Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

The Wichita Rotary Charitable Fund Inc

To seek funds through gifts, donations and other means, and to manage and distribute those funds in a manner that will support and advance selected programs of the rotary club of wichita, inc.

$191k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$80k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 81% of THE WICHITA ROTARY CHARITABLE FUND INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $41k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $140k
$60,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ROTARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT$80,000
ROTARY IMPACT$60,000
ROTARY CLUB RIF PROJECT$41,141
ROTARY CLUB DICTIONARY PROJECT$9,916
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%CAMP DESTINATION INNOVATION: $8k → 16%GIRL SCOUTS OF KANSAS HEARTLAND INC: $7k → 16%HUMANKIND MINISTRIES: $40k → 16%HUMANKIND MINISTRIES: $15k → 16%HUMANKIND MINISTRIES: $15k → 16%HUMANKIND MINISTRIES: $10k → 16%QUIVIRA COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERI: $15k → 16%ROTARY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: $80k → 16%ROTARY IMPACT: $60k → 16%ROTARY CLUB RIF PROJECT: $60k → 16%ROTARY CLUB RIF PROJECT: $59k → 16%ROTARY CLUB RIF PROJECT: $58k → 16%ROTARY CLUB RIF PROJECT: $45k → 16%ROTARY CLUB RIF PROJECT: $43k → 16%ROTARY CLUB RIF PROJECT: $41k → 16%ROTARY CLUB RIF PROJECT: $41k → 16%ROTARY CLUB RIF PROJECT: $40k → 16%ROTARY CLUB DICTIONARY PROJECT: $31k → 16%ROTARY CLUB DICTIONARY PROJECT: $30k → 16%ROTARY CLUB DICTIONARY PROJECT: $30k → 16%ROTARY CLUB DICTIONARY PROJECT: $28k → 16%ROTARY CLUB JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT: $17k → 16%ROTARY CLUB JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT: $17k → 16%ROTARY CLUB JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT: $15k → 16%ROTARY CLUB JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT: $15k → 16%ROTARY CLUB JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT: $15k → 16%ROTARY CLUB JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT: $15k → 16%WICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $15k → 16%WICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $15k → 16%WICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $15k → 16%ROTARY CLUB RIF PROJECT: $15k → 16%ROTARY CLUB JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT: $14k → 16%WICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $13k → 16%WICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $13k → 16%WICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $13k → 16%ROTARY CLUB DICTIONARY PROJECT: $11k → 16%ROTARY CLUB DICTIONARY PROJECT: $11k → 16%ICT SOS: $11k → 16%ROTARY CLUB DICTIONARY PROJECT: $10k → 16%THE SALVATION ARMY: $10k → 16%THE SALVATION ARMY: $10k → 16%ROTARY CLUB DICTIONARY PROJECT: $10k → 16%ROTARY WRAPS: $10k → 16%ROTARY WRAPS: $5k → 16%KPTS: $10k → 16%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$987k · 3 repeat orgs$70k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +36% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.

3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
7

Total granted

$987k
$70k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+14%

Still filing today

100%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Housing & ShelterReligionCrime & LegalYouth DevelopmentCommunity ImprovementArts & CultureOther

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

  • RC
    ROTARY CLUB OF WICHITA INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $825k · revenue +36% · 42% of their budget
  • WH
    WICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC
    6× · 2017–2023 · $83k · revenue +146%
  • HM
    HUMANKIND MINISTRIES WICHITA INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $80k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • QC
    QUIVIRA COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA INC
    one grant, 2024 · $15k · revenue 0%
  • IS
    ICT SOS
    one grant, 2024 · $11k · revenue 0%
  • SA
    SALVATION ARMY NATIONAL CORP
    one grant, 2023 · $10k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Wichita County Economic Development

To improve the quality of life for residents of wichita county, ks through community and economic development activities.

Community Improvement
2
North Central Kansas Housing Opportunities Inc
Community Improvement
3
Wichita Falls University Kiwanis Foundation Inc
4
Wichita County Heritage Society Dba Kell House Heritage Center

Inspire and educate the community to engage in preservation through the kell house heritage center.

Arts & Culture
5
Wichita Regional Chamber of Commerce Inc

To drive economic growth and community advancement in the wichita region.

6
Wichita Swim Club

The wichita swim club is dedicated to competitive swimming, serving swimmers from all over the wichita and south central kansas area

Recreation & Sports
7
Wichita Independent Neighborhoods Inc

To provide education, resources, and an effective voice to and for current and potential members on quality of life issues in wichita and sedgwick county.

Community Improvement
8
Kansas Alpha of Phi Delta Theta Educational Foundation
9
Sporting Wichita Inc

The mission of Sporting Wichita is to provide a positive safe and professional environment which encourages early development and fosters a lifelong interest in soccer We seek to provide consistent quality programming structure education…

Recreation & Sports
10
Opportunity Wichita Inc

Engage community partners (including local governments, nonprofit organizations, and public institutions) to develop a community vision to address education, quality of life, infrastructure, workforce, and economic development and…

Community Improvement
11
Wichita Collegiate School

We exist to inspire all students to be the best versions of themselves through a transformative education grounded in academic excellence within our inclusive community.

Education
12
Kansas Business Hall of Fame Inc

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rotary Club of Wichita Inc and the most unlike its peers is Destination Innovation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 10 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ROTARY CLUB OF WICHITA INC — $824,813 · OtherROTARY CLUB OF WICHITA INC+3 more — $35,000 · OtherWICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC — $82,500 · Housing & ShelterHUMANKIND MINISTRIES WICHITA INC — $80,000 · ReligionICT SOS — $10,549 · Crime & LegalKANSAS PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE — $10,000 · Arts & CultureDESTINATION INNOVATION INC — $8,000 · Community ImprovementGIRL SCOUTS OF KANSAS HEARTLAND INC — $6,515 · Youth Development
Other$859,813Housing & Shelter$82,500Religion$80,000Crime & Legal$10,549Arts & Culture$10,000Community Improvement$8,000Youth Development$6,515

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetROTARY CLUB OF WICHITA INC — $824,813 over 9y, 42% of budgetWICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC — $82,500 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetHUMANKIND MINISTRIES WICHITA INC — $80,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetQUIVIRA COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA INC — $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetICT SOS — $10,549 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetKANSAS PUBLIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE — $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetDESTINATION INNOVATION INC — $8,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF KANSAS HEARTLAND INC — $6,515 over 1y, 0.2% of budget
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.

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.

Wichita FoundationKS19.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Wichita Foundation · United Way of the Plains Inc · Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353 · The Fidelity Bank Foundation · Dwane L and Velma Lunt Wallace Charitable Foundation · Berry Foundation Inc · Kansas Health Foundation · Bruce G Cochener Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Wichita Rotary Charitable Fund Inc 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 10 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

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

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph