Skip to content

· Private foundation

W Buehler Family 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.

$253k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$60k
Largest
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Food & Nutrition$2.0MInternational$653kHuman Services$218kYouth Development$75kEducation$43kReligion$27kHealth$16kCivil Rights$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $19k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $70k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $164k
$13,455
Median grant
8
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SHEPHERDS PANTRY$60,000
SHREDDING HUNGER$53,820
THE KID PROJECT$50,000
CITY OF HOPE SF$30,000
FEEDING SOUTH DAKOTA$13,455
FOOD BANK OF IOWA$13,455
NE IOWA FOOD BANK$13,455
LOS ANGELES REGIONAL FOOD BANK$6,939
FOOD BANK OF LINCOLN$6,399
ROADRUNNER FOOD BANK$2,723
SOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK$1,422
HARVESTERS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK$1,195
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 (FY18–21, $64k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%UNION RESCUE MISSIONS: $5k → 14%SOWING SEEDS FOR LIFE: $29k → 14%SOWING SEEDS FOR LIFE: $27k → 14%FORGOTTEN CHILDREN: $3k → 14%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

NY
NV
IA
CA
CO
MO
VA
TN
OK
GA
TX
FL
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.

47%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.6M · 17 repeat orgs$1.8M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +40% since the first grant, against -21% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
12

Total granted

$1.6M
$1.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
-21%

Still filing today

41%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $113k 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
Food & NutritionInternationalHuman ServicesEducationHealthReligionOther
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

  • SP
    SHEPHERDS PANTRY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $461k · revenue +354%
  • CI
    CHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA
    3× · 2017–2021 · $201k · revenue +3%
  • W
    WATERORG
    6× · 2017–2023 · $145k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • FT
    FEED THE CHILDREN INC
    one grant, 2023 · $1.5M · revenue -23%
  • UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF
    one grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue -21%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA- DAVIS
    one grant, 2022 · $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
United Food Bank

United Food Bank unites communities to alleviate hunger.

Food & Nutrition
2
Feeding San Diego

On a mission to connect every person facing hunger with nutritious meals by maximizing food rescue. through direct service and community partnerships, feeding san diego provides more than 26 million meals each year to children, families,…

Food & Nutrition
3
Food for the Hungry Inc

Food for the hungry is a christian humanitarian aid and global development organization that has designed, developed and delivered solutions for more than 50 years so that children, families and communities can flourish. (continued on…

International
4
Central California Food Bank

Ccfb is dedicated to ending hunger, working with over 200 partner agencies to provide food to those experiencing hunger. our mission: transforming lives together, in the passionate pursuit to end hunger in central ca - one meal, one…

Food & Nutrition
5
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
6
Central Pennsylvania Food Bank

Our mission is to solve hunger in central pennsylvania by ensuring that everyone struggling with hunger has access to enough wholesome food every day. we will achieve this bold goal with the help of our generous donors, volunteers and…

Food & Nutrition
7
California Association of Food Banks

California association of food banks (cafb) is a non-profit public benefit corporation located in oakland, california. together with its 41-member foodbanks, cafb is the largest charitable hunger-relief and anti-hunger leader in the state.…

Food & Nutrition
8
Great Plains Food Bank

End hunger together.

Food & Nutrition
9
The Food Bank for Central & Northeast Missouri

The food bank for central & northeast missouri is a regional disaster and hunger relief network that acquires and distributes millions of meals each year to help neighbors get the food they need to thrive. (continued on schedule o)the…

Food & Nutrition
10
America's Second Harvest of the Big Bend Inc

To advance change by feeding the hungry and educating and engaging the community in the fight to end hunger.

Food & Nutrition
11
Feeding Texas

To lead a unified effort for a hunger-free texas.

Community Improvement
12
The Food Bank for Larimer County

To provide food to all in need through community partnerships and hunger relief programs. Our vision is a hunger-free Larimer County.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Feed the Children Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Learning Centers at Fairplex. 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

22 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. 22 of the 38 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)
20/22
Grantees still filing
10/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FEED THE CHILDREN INC: $1,526,317 · InternationalFEED THE CHILDREN INCCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $200,848 · InternationalCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USAWATERORG: $145,000 · InternationalWATERORGUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $100,000 · InternationalCITY OF HOPE: $160,000 · OtherCITY OF HOPETHE KID PROJECT: $125,000 · OtherTHE KID PROJECTTHE A21 CAMPAIGN INC: $75,000 · OtherTHE A21 CAMPAIGN INCIndividual grant recipient: $60,000 · OtherIndividual grant recip…SIHK CENTER OC: $53,950 · OtherSIHK CENTER OCSHREDDING HUNGER: $53,820 · OtherSHREDDING HUNGERCITY OF HOPE SF: $35,000 · OtherU C DAVIS: $25,000 · Other+12 more: $91,589 · Other+12 moreSHEPHERDS PANTRY: $461,040 · Food & NutritionSHEPHERDS PANTRY+5 more: $37,454 · Food & Nutrition+5 moreHEART FOR AFRICA INC: $131,000 · ReligionSOWING SEEDS FOR LIFE: $56,600 · Human ServicesUNION RESCUE MISSION: $5,000 · Human ServicesFORGOTTEN CHILDREN INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesCHRISTIAN WORLD OUTREACH: $22,000 · EmploymentAZUSA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY: $6,000 · EducationTHE RENAISSANCE LEARNING CENTER INC: $5,000 · EducationAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $1,000 · Health
International$1,972,165Other$679,359Food & Nutrition$498,494Religion$131,000Human Services$64,100Employment$22,000Education$11,000Health$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFEED THE CHILDREN INC: $1,526,317 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSHEPHERDS PANTRY: $461,040 over 9y, 3.0% of budgetCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $200,848 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWATERORG: $145,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetHEART FOR AFRICA INC: $131,000 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE A21 CAMPAIGN INC: $75,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetSOWING SEEDS FOR LIFE: $56,600 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetCHRISTIAN WORLD OUTREACH: $22,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetThe Learning Centers at Fairplex: $20,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetFOOD BANK OF IOWA: $13,455 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFEEDING SOUTH DAKOTA: $13,455 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLOS ANGELES REGIONAL FOOD BANK: $6,939 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD BANK OF LINCOLN INC: $6,399 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAZUSA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE RENAISSANCE LEARNING CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNION RESCUE MISSION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetROADRUNNER FOOD BANK INC: $2,723 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK INC: $1,422 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $1,000 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.

  • Who funds FEED THE CHILDREN INC ↗
  • Who funds SHEPHERDS PANTRY ↗
  • Who funds CHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA ↗
  • Who funds WATERORG ↗
  • Who funds HEART FOR AFRICA INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
  • Who funds THE A21 CAMPAIGN INC ↗
  • Who funds SOWING SEEDS FOR LIFE ↗
  • Who funds CHRISTIAN WORLD OUTREACH ↗
  • Who funds The Learning Centers at Fairplex ↗
  • Who funds FOOD BANK OF IOWA ↗
  • Who funds FEEDING SOUTH DAKOTA ↗
  • Who funds LOS ANGELES REGIONAL FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds FOOD BANK OF LINCOLN INC ↗
  • Who funds AZUSA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds THE RENAISSANCE LEARNING CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds UNION RESCUE MISSION ↗
  • Who funds ROADRUNNER FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds FORGOTTEN CHILDREN INC ↗
  • Who funds BLISSFUL LIVING GROUP HOME INC ↗
  • Who funds SOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗

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.

California Community FoundationCA12.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 W Buehler Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from W Buehler Family 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%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Feed the Children Inc: 1% of income from government
  • The Renaissance Learning Center Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report 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 38 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 W Buehler Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph