Skip to content
William and Ruth Scott Family Foundation at a glance

· Public charity

William and Ruth Scott Family Foundation

Support the Omaha Community Foundation's Mission.

$26M
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$400k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Education$18MHuman Services$6.3MYouth Development$2.7MCrime & Legal$1.8MHousing & Shelter$685kHealth$453kCommunity Improvement$375kRecreation & Sports$110kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $570,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $25,532,409 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $24,962,409 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $120k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+1 grant · $400k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$215M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Avenue Scholars Foundation$400,000
Alliance Recreation Center$50,000
Angels Among Us Inc$25,000
Abide Network$25,000
100 Black Men of Omaha Inc$20,000
Autism Action Partnership$20,000
At Ease USA$15,000
Aqua Africa Inc$15,000
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, $1.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Valley Child Development Cent: $25k → 11%YMCA of Norfolk: $10k → 13%Panhandle Partnership for Hea: $65k → 16%MACCH: $200k → 12%Womens Fund of Omaha: $762k → 12%Womens Center for Advancemen: $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.
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.

10%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.0M · 11 repeat orgs$28M to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
43

Total granted

$3.0M
$28M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+6%
+58%

Still filing today

100%
95%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentPhilanthropyCrime & LegalHealthOther
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

  • AS
    AVENUE SCHOLARS
    3× · 2020–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +0%
  • BU
    Bellevue University
    3× · 2020–2022 · $650k · revenue +39%
  • BB
    BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE MIDLANDS
    3× · 2020–2022 · $140k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $11M · revenue +31%
  • NC
    NEBRASKA CHILDREN & FAMILIES FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $5.5M · revenue +2%
  • PH
    PROJECT HARMONYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $1.8M · revenue +118%
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
One Omaha

One omaha empowers people where they live with education, training, and engagement to develop thriving neighborhoods.

Community Improvement
2
Nebraska Alliance of Child Advocacy Centers

To enhance nebraska's response to child abuse.

Crime & Legal
3
Eastern Nebraska Community Action Partnership

Encap provides high-impact programs to help people get ahead.

—
4
Nebraska Community Foundation

The nebraska community foundation unleashes abundant local assets, inspires charitable giving, and connects ambitious people to build stronger communities and a greater nebraska.

Philanthropy
5
Nebraska Community College Assoc

Support for community colleges

—
6
Nebraska Credit Union League Inc

To promote credit unions in nebraska

—
7
Educare of Lincoln Inc

To help young children thrive socially, emotionally and academically through high-quality early childhood education, and in partnership with their families and the community.

Education
8
Community Action of Nebraska Inc

Mission: community action of nebraska strives to alleviate poverty through enhancing program development, providing technical assistance, and advocating public policy to support all community action agencies in nebraska.

Community Improvement
9
Omaha Community Foundation

To serve the community by cultivating generosity and strengthening nonprofits.

Philanthropy
10
Omaha Economic Development Corporation

The mission of oedc is to implement economic development projects, housing, and community revitalization programs that create jobs, business ownership opportunities and other economic benefits for area residents.

—
11
Stand for Schools

Stand for schools supports nebraska's public schools, working to advance policies that make them stronger while opposing policies that would weaken them.

Education
12
Council of Independent Nebraska Colleges Foundation

The council of indepependent nebraska colleges foundation exists to provide operating funds and scholarship support for students attending nebraska's independent institutions of excellence.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nebraska Early Childhood Collaborative; the most unlike its peers is Wood River Vision 2020. 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

53 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 53 of the 55 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)
16
Early backer (in before they grew)
53/53
Grantees still filing
41/53
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $11,047,687 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATIONCollective For Youth: $1,480,000 · EducationCollective For YouthAVENUE SCHOLARS: $1,350,000 · EducationAVENUE SCHOLARSEDUCARE OF OMAHA INC: $1,000,000 · EducationNELSON MANDELA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL INC: $950,000 · EducationBellevue University: $650,000 · Education+10 more: $2,531,764 · Education+10 moreNEBRASKA CHILDREN & FAMILIES FOUNDATION: $5,530,221 · PhilanthropyNEBRASKA CHILDREN & F…+3 more: $217,758 · PhilanthropyPROJECT HARMONY: $1,792,600 · Crime & Legal+2 more: $25,000 · Crime & LegalNEBRASKA EARLY CHILDHOOD COLLABORATIVE: $350,000 · OtherCHADRON STATE FOUNDATION: $175,000 · OtherBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE MIDLANDS: $140,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY ALLIANCE INC: $125,000 · OtherABIDE NETWORK INC: $100,000 · OtherNEBRASKA GAME AND PARKS COMMISSION: $99,211 · OtherOMAHA PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION: $97,500 · OtherNONPROFIT ASSOCIATION OF THE MIDLANDS: $130,000 · OtherWOOD RIVER VISION 2020: $125,000 · OtherANGELS AMONG US: $80,000 · Other+10 more: $280,000 · OtherWOMEN'S FUND OF GREATER OMAHA INC: $762,000 · Human ServicesTHRESHOLD COC: $200,000 · Human ServicesPANHANDLE PARTNERSHIP INC: $65,000 · Human Services+3 more: $45,000 · Human ServicesBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS: $750,000 · Youth DevelopmentAINSWORTH CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC: $95,000 · Youth DevelopmentTHE BIKE UNION MENTORING PROJECT: $90,000 · Youth Development+2 more: $30,000 · Youth DevelopmentHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF OMAHA INC: $485,000 · Housing & Shelter
Education$19,009,451Philanthropy$5,747,979Crime & Legal$1,817,600Other$1,701,711Human Services$1,072,000Youth Development$965,000Housing & Shelter$485,000

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 budgetUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $11,047,687 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetNEBRASKA CHILDREN & FAMILIES FOUNDATION: $5,530,221 over 1y, 13% of budgetPROJECT HARMONY: $1,792,600 over 1y, 15% of budgetCollective For Youth: $1,480,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetAVENUE SCHOLARS: $1,350,000 over 3y, 9.9% of budgetEDUCARE OF OMAHA INC: $1,000,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetNELSON MANDELA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL INC: $950,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetWOMEN'S FUND OF GREATER OMAHA INC: $762,000 over 1y, 7.2% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS: $750,000 over 1y, 8.8% of budgetBellevue University: $650,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetCHILDREN'S SCHOLARSHIP FUND OF OMAHA: $550,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF OMAHA INC: $485,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetMETROPOLITAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $459,834 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetBOONE BEGINNINGS EARLY CHILDHOOD AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC: $393,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetWAYNE STATE FOUNDATION: $387,500 over 1y, 8.2% of budgetNEBRASKA EARLY CHILDHOOD COLLABORATIVE: $350,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetCENTRAL COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $250,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetCOLLEGE OF SAINT MARY: $208,430 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTHRESHOLD COC: $200,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetCHADRON STATE FOUNDATION: $175,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetCOLLEGE POSSIBLE INC: $150,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE MIDLANDS: $140,000 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetNONPROFIT ASSOCIATION OF THE MIDLANDS: $130,000 over 1y, 8.9% of budgetCOMMUNITY ALLIANCE INC: $125,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetWOOD RIVER VISION 2020: $125,000 over 1y, 9.9% of budgetNORTH PLATTE COMM COLLEGE FOUND INC: $125,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetABIDE NETWORK INC: $100,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetOMAHA PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION: $97,500 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetAINSWORTH CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC: $95,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetTHE BIKE UNION MENTORING PROJECT: $90,000 over 2y, 9.1% of budgetANGELS AMONG US: $80,000 over 4y, 2.0% of budget100 BLACK MEN OF OMAHA INC: $70,000 over 4y, 4.8% of budgetAUTISM ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $70,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetPANHANDLE PARTNERSHIP INC: $65,000 over 1y, 6.2% of budgetSANTA MONICA INC: $50,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetALLIANCE RECREATION CENTER: $50,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetAQUA-AFRICA INC: $40,000 over 2y, 5.4% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS NEBRASKA INC: $35,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetAT EASE USA: $30,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetROAM SHARE: $25,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetTHE VALLEY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC: $25,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetPENDER COMMUNITY HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION INC: $22,758 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetBANISTER'S LEADERSHIP ACADEMY: $20,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetNEW NORTH MAKERHOOD: $20,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetLEGAL AID OF NEBRASKA: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHEART MINISTRY CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNEBRASKA APPLESEED CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST: $10,000 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.

The Sherwood Foundati…The Lozier FoundationRobert B Daugherty Fo…Nebraska Community Fo…Mutual of Omaha Found…The Holland FoundationLeland J & Dorothy H …Weitz Family Foundati…Peter Kiewit Foundati…The Charles and Mary …Suzanne & Walter Scot…The Hawks Foundation
The Sherwood FoundationNE82× affinity39 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Sherwood Foundation · The Lozier Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · Nebraska Community Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · The Holland Foundation · Leland J & Dorothy H Olson Charitable Foundation · Weitz Family Foundation · Peter Kiewit Foundation · The Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · Suzanne & Walter Scott Foundation · The Hawks 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 William and Ruth Scott Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from William and Ruth Scott Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%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
    21report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to William and Ruth Scott Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to William and Ruth Scott Family 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.

    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 55 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on William and Ruth Scott Family’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