· Private foundation
The Lozier Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k107 grants · $424k
- $10k–50k134 grants · $3.2M
- $50k–250k152 grants · $14M
- $250k+57 grants · $32M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MENTAL HEALTH INNOVATION FOUNDATION | $2,000,000 |
| FRONT PORCH INVESTMENTS | $2,000,000 |
| BLACK POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF OMAHA | $1,500,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION | $1,250,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION | $1,100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION | $1,048,000 |
| NEBRASKA METHODIST HOSPITAL FOUNDATION | $1,000,000 |
| YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES INC | $1,000,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION | $1,000,000 |
| COLLECTIVE FOR HOPE | $1,000,000 |
| COLLEGE OF ST MARY | $1,000,000 |
| WOMENS FUND OF GREATER OMAHA INC | $800,000 |
| HOPEWELL FUND | $600,000 |
| WOMENS FUND OF GREATER OMAHA INC | $540,000 |
| OMAHA PARKS FOUNDATION INC | $500,387 |
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 (FY17–24, $37.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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 +45% since the first grant, against +27% for the ones you funded once.
383 repeat relationships — 194 still active in FY2024, 189 since wound down; 113 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
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 FY2024, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8.1M 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
- UOUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2024 · $13M · revenue +70%
- COCOLLEGE OF SAINT MARY8× · 2017–2024 · $5.5M · revenue +67%
- NMNEBRASKA METHODIST HOSPITAL FOUNDATION5× · 2017–2024 · $4.6M · revenue +95%
Funded once
- LCLAKE CUNNINGHAM DEVELOPMENT TRUSTone grant, 2021 · $750k · revenue -87%
- CPCREIGHTON PREPARATORY SCHOOLSone grant, 2020 · $750k
- HFHABITAT FOR HUMANITYone grant, 2019 · $630k
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.
To build the capacity of youth serving organizations, service providers, families and community to claim their voice, cultivate healing and take courageous action to improve their overall health and well being.
A restorative justice agency committed to habilitating justice in nebraska.
Omaha forus builds intentional community and creates equitable space in service to lgbtq+ individuals and families of eastern nebraska and western iowa.
To increase business, employment, and investment in the greater omaha area.
To promote credit unions in nebraska
The organization's purpose is to ensure a fair and modern democracy in nebraska through research, education, and advocacy for policies and practices that promote participation in democracy.
To enhance nebraska's response to child abuse.
Unite realtor boards to be able to influence matters affecting real estate state wide, unify laws and regulations and promote education among members
Support for community colleges
Nonprofit corporation which provides leadership development and enhancement through educational programs and opportunities for community involvement.
The organization's mission is to expand the world of possibilities for aging through advocacy, collaboration, and education.
Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Omaha Bridges Out of Poverty Inc and the most unlike its peers is Outride fka the Specialized Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 23 years old; the field is 22. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
376 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. 376 of the 716 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S FUND OF GREATER OMAHA INC ↗
- Who funds COLLEGE OF SAINT MARY ↗
- Who funds OMAHA PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA METHODIST HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF OMAHA INC ↗
- Who funds MENTAL HEALTH INNOVATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KIDS CAN COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT ↗
- Who funds METROPOLITAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds OMAHA PARKS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HEART MINISTRY CENTER ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE FOR OUR NEIGHBORS-NEBRASKA ↗
- Who funds ONEWORLD COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC ↗
- Who funds Collective For Youth ↗
- Who funds Front Porch Investments ↗
- Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA ↗
- Who funds BLACK POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF OMA ↗
- Who funds SIMPLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MICAH HOUSE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S SCHOLARSHIP FUND OF OMAHA ↗
- Who funds YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds HOLY NAME HOUSING CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA YOUTH JUSTICE INITIATIVE DBA RADIUS ↗
- Who funds PHOENIX ACADEMY DAY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds AVENUE SCHOLARS ↗
- Who funds HEARTLAND FAMILY SERVICE ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS SPIRIT OF NEBRASKA ↗
- Who funds Creighton University ↗
- Who funds CONNECTED ROOTS CARE CENTER ↗
- Who funds URBAN LEAGUE OF NEBRASKA ↗
- Who funds COLLEGE POSSIBLE INC ↗
- Who funds Teachers College Columbia University ↗
- Who funds GRIEF'S JOURNEY THE COLLECTIVE FOR HOPE ↗
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 · Weitz Family Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · The Hawks Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · Peter Kiewit Foundation · The Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · United Way of the Midlands · Suzanne & Walter Scott Foundation · The Holland Foundation · Nebraska Community Foundation · Immanuel Community Vision 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 Lozier 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.
- Education Northwest — 44% of income from government
- Reach Out and Read Inc — 9% of income from government
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 Lozier Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Lozier 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.