Skip to content
The Scoular Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Scoular 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.

$564k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$564k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Philanthropy$6.2MRecreation & Sports$150kHousing & Shelter$25kHuman Services$13kHealth$11kFood & Nutrition$10kYouth Development$6kEducation$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$564,381
Median grant
1
States reached
$5k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VANGUARD$564,381
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY20–20, $12k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%THE DOVES PROGRAM: $2k → 12%DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND ABUSE CENTER INC: $250 → 11%CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE: $10k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

ND
OR
IA
RI
NE
MO
KS
SC
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 60% of The Scoular Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Scoular Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Cultivate Kansas City Inc

Grow food, farms and community in support of a sustainable, healthy and local food system.

Food & Nutrition
2
Nebraska Children & Families Foundation

Nebraska children's mission is to create positive change for children through community engagement. our vision is a nebraska where all children will have the resources and support to reach their full potential. our values are (1)…

Philanthropy
3
Chain of Hope Kc

Outreach to help animals suffering in the urban core of kansas city.

Animals
4
South Carolina Network of Children's Advocacy Centers

Empowering south carolina communities and children's advocacy centers to deliver a best practice response to child abuse

Youth Development
5
Kansas Legal Services Inc

Kansas legal services is devoted to helping low income kansans meet their basic needs through the provision of important legal and mediation services.

—
6
Feeding South Dakota

To eliminate hunger in south dakota.

Food & Nutrition
7
Dui Victims Center of Kansas Inc

Reduce the impact an impaired driving crash has on victims, survivors and their families, and increase awareness of the traumatic human consequences of the choice to drive impaired

Education
8
Community Foundation of Southeast Kansas

The Community Foundation of Southeast Kansas servces the region by encouraging charitable giving benefiting the common good and the quality of life.

Philanthropy
9
Concord Mediation Center

Organized for the purpose of assisting individuals and groups in the resolution and management of conflicts, promoting public awareness and understanding of alternative dispute resolutions, providing educational materials, workshops and…

Crime & Legal
10
Food Bank of Iowa

The organization receives, warehouses, and distributes salvageable food items to non-profit tax exempt member agencies to feed the ill, needy, and infants.

Food & Nutrition
11
Child Safe of Central Missouri Inc

Child safe of central missouri's mission is to respond to and prevent child abuse by providing advocacy, support, and resources to children who are alleged victims of abuse and other traumatic crimes, and to their non-offending family…

Crime & Legal
12
Great Plains Food Bank

End hunger together.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Child Saving Institute Inc; the most unlike its peers is Dorchester Paws. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 30 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
13/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Omaha Community Foundation: $4,336,530 · PhilanthropyOmaha Community Foundation+2 more: $54,347 · PhilanthropyVANGUARD: $1,764,381 · OtherVANGUARD+16 more: $51,725 · OtherDOWNTOWN RIVERFRONT TRUST: $150,000 · Community ImprovementCHILD SAVING INSTITUTE INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesTHE DOVES PROGRAM: $2,000 · Human Services+1 more: $250 · Human ServicesCOMPLETELY KIDS: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentALL ABOARD FOR KIDS: $875 · Youth DevelopmentTHE NEBRASKA LAWYERS FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Crime & LegalGREEN CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC: $375 · EducationCHARLESTON ANIMAL SOCIETY: $250 · AnimalsDorchester Paws: $125 · Animals
Philanthropy$4,390,877Other$1,816,106Community Improvement$150,000Human Services$12,250Youth Development$5,875Crime & Legal$1,000Education$375Animals$375

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetOmaha Community Foundation: $4,336,530 over 5y, 1.4% of budgetDOWNTOWN RIVERFRONT TRUST: $150,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUNITED WAY OF THE MIDLANDS: $51,347 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCHILD SAVING INSTITUTE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOOD BANK FOR THE HEARTLAND: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMPLETELY KIDS: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGreater Kansas City Community Foundation: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE DOVES PROGRAM: $2,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE NEBRASKA LAWYERS FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetGREEN CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC: $375 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCAMP HAPPY DAYS INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND ABUSE CENTER: $250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLOWCOUNTRY FOOD BANK INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHARLESTON ANIMAL SOCIETY: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDorchester Paws: $125 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Scoular Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Scoular Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 30 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Scoular’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home