Skip to content
The Wichita Rotary Charitable Fund Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· 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 it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its 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, FY2017 to 2025.

Employment$638kHousing & Shelter$163kYouth Development$137kCommunity Improvement$80kHuman Services$20kCrime & Legal$11kArts & Culture$10k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its 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
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.
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

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

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +36% since the first grant, against +14% for those 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
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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
How this is measured

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

04Its 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
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
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rotary Club of Wichita Inc; 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 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. 8 of the 10 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.

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

Where the money sits, by cause and 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 grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's 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
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.

Wichita FoundationUnited Way of the Pla…Textron Charitable Tr…The Fidelity Bank Fou…Dwane L and Velma Lun…Berry Foundation IncKansas Health Foundat…Bruce G Cochener Foun…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
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

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 Wichita Rotary Charitable Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Wichita Rotary Charitable Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's 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, 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 10 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 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 Wichita Rotary’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