· Private foundation
The Claire M Hubbard Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
Read this first · the figures below need context
56% of The Claire M Hubbard Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Omaha Community Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year The Claire M Hubbard Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 28 organizations, $9M. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2021
- Under $10k10 grants · $46k
- $10k–50k35 grants · $851k
- $50k–250k18 grants · $1.9M
- $250k+6 grants · $6.4M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LAURITZEN GARDEN | $2,000,000 |
| ST AUGUSTINE INDIAN MISSION | $1,500,000 |
| NE URBAN INDIAN CTR | $980,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION | $730,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $669,500 |
| NEBRASKA WILDLIFE REHAB | $500,000 |
| ANGELS AMONG US | $200,000 |
| ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION | $200,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION | $200,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $140,000 |
| LAKE CUNNINGHAM TRUST | $131,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $100,000 |
| OMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $100,000 |
| CUES FUND | $100,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY20–21, $151k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +44% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.
35 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2021, 10 since wound down; 47 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
- OZOMAHA ZOO FOUNDATION3× · 2020–2024 · $2.6M · revenue +34%
- KKANEKO3× · 2020–2022 · $630k · revenue +77% · 27% of their budget
- NANATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION3× · 2020–2022 · $301k · revenue +33%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $526k
- MCMETRO COMMUNITY COLLEGEone grant, 2020 · $105k
- NMNO MORE EMPTY POTSone grant, 2020 · $85k · revenue -32%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
One omaha empowers people where they live with education, training, and engagement to develop thriving neighborhoods.
Our mission is to help nonprofits fulfill theirs.
The mission of oedc is to implement economic development projects, housing, and community revitalization programs that create jobs, business ownership opportunities and other economic benefits for area residents.
Stand for schools supports nebraska's public schools, working to advance policies that make them stronger while opposing policies that would weaken them.
We believe in thoughtful, ecologically-minded practices and the curation of accessible, educational, and inspirational experiences that enhance lives.
The mission of the omaha sports commission is to foster a positive socio-economic impact on and a heightened awareness and image of omaha by attracting, hosting, & supporting amateur sporting events.
The nmu foundation will establish and foster relationships to generate resources that benefit the strategic goals of northern michigan university.
Grow food, farms and community in support of a sustainable, healthy and local food system.
The mission of the urban league of nebraska is to be an empowering voice in the community advocating for economic self-reliance, parity, power, civil rights and equal opportunity for all (see schedule o). the vision of the urban league of…
We transform lives through organ and tissue donation.
To promote credit unions in nebraska
Common good iowa engages iowans to create and advocate for research-based public policy that makes life better and more equitable for all who make iowa home.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nebraska Community Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Youth Emergency Services Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 21. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 9% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
54 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 54 of the 114 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds Omaha Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds OMAHA ZOO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JOSLYN ART MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KANEKO ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA WILDLIFE REHAB INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ANGELS AMONG US ↗
- Who funds VISION MAKER MEDIA ↗
- Who funds CUES FUND ↗
- Who funds OMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FONTENELLE FOREST ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HARMONY ↗
- Who funds HEALTHY HOUSING OMAHA ↗
- Who funds MILLARD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds OMAHA PERMACULTURE ↗
- Who funds ONEWORLD COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LINCOLN CHILDREN'S ZOO ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA CHILDREN & FAMILIES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NO MORE EMPTY POTS ↗
- Who funds Collective For Youth ↗
- Who funds OMAHA PARKS FOUNDATION ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: The Sherwood Foundation · The Lozier Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · Peter Kiewit Foundation · Weitz Family Foundation · The Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · The Holland Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · Leland J & Dorothy H Olson Charitable Foundation · Dixon Family Foundation · Richard Brooke Foundation · The Hawks Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Claire M Hubbard Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Claire M Hubbard Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Claire M Hubbard Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.