Skip to content
William R Patrick Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

William R Patrick 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.

$128k
Granted FY2025still arriving
21
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$221kArts & Culture$220kHealth$179kRecreation & Sports$134kYouth Development$118kReligion$89kAnimals$53kEducation$47kOther$0
02FY2025 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k18 grants · $98k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $30k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE$10,000
MOSAIC$10,000
JOSLYN CASTLE & GARDENS$10,000
HOPE CENTER INC$8,500
RESPECT$8,500
CASA FOR DOUGLAS COUNTY$7,500
NEBRASKA ADAPTIVE SPORTS$7,500
PARTNERSHIP 4 KIDS$7,500
CASTING FOR RECOVERY$7,500
ANGELS AMONG US$7,000
OMAHA COMMUNITY PLAYHOUSE$5,000
NEBRASKA CULTURAL ENDOWMENT$5,000
HETRA$5,000
RADIO TALKING BOOK SERVICES$5,000
FOOD BANK OF THE HEARTLAND$5,000
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 (FY17–25, $222k) 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%CHILDREN'S RESPITE CARE CENTER: $6k → 12%LEAGUE OF HUMAN DIGNITY: $10k → 12%LEAGUE OF HUMAN DIGNITY: $10k → 12%CHILDREN'S RESPITE CARE CENTER: $5k → 12%LEAGUE OF HUMAN DIGNITY: $10k → 12%LEAGUE OF HUMAN DIGNITY: $9k → 12%CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE: $15k → 12%CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE: $15k → 12%CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE: $15k → 12%CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE: $15k → 12%CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE: $15k → 12%CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE: $13k → 12%CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE: $10k → 12%CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE: $10k → 12%CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE: $10k → 12%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA: $5k → 12%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA: $5k → 12%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA: $5k → 12%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA: $5k → 12%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA: $5k → 12%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA: $5k → 12%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA: $5k → 12%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA: $5k → 12%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA: $4k → 12%WOMAN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $5k → 12%WOMAN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $4k → 12%WOMAN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $3k → 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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 36 repeat orgs$24k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +35% since the first grant, against +33% for those funded once.

36 repeat relationships: 21 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

36
5

Total granted

$1.3M
$24k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+33%

Still filing today

75%
40%

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
Human ServicesYouth DevelopmentHealthArts & CultureHousing & ShelterRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • CS
    CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $118k · revenue +60%
  • M
    MOSAIC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $99k · revenue +73%
  • NA
    NEBRASKA ADAPTIVE SPORTS
    8× · 2018–2025 · $71k · revenue +52%

Funded once

  • EN
    EASTERN NEBRASKA WHEELCHAIR ATHLETIC ASSN
    one grant, 2017 · $12k
  • BG
    BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDSgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $7k · revenue +33%
  • WF
    WESTSIDE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
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
Omaha Sports Commission

The mission of the omaha sports commission is to foster a positive socio-economic impact on and a heightened awareness and image of omaha by attracting, hosting, & supporting amateur sporting events.

Recreation & Sports
3
Share Omaha

Our mission is to help nonprofits fulfill theirs.

Philanthropy
4
Girls Incorporated of Omaha

Girls incorporated of omaha serves girls of ages 5 through 18 with various gender specific programs designed to provide the girls with activities and experiences which meet their needs.

Youth Development
5
Nebraska Alliance of Child Advocacy Centers

To enhance nebraska's response to child abuse.

Crime & Legal
6
Omaha Community Foundation

To serve the community by cultivating generosity and strengthening nonprofits.

Philanthropy
7
Omaha Theater Company

To inspire young people and their families to discover the magic of theater, find their voices, and enrich their communities. theater is utilized as a tool in the educational and social development of young people to provide formal…

Arts & Culture
8
Voices for Children in Nebraska

Voices for children in nebraska is the independent voice building pathways to opportunity for all children and families through research, policy and community engagement.

—
9
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.

—
10
Omaha Children's Museum

Omaha children's museum is a not-for-profit organization that provides children and families with opportunities to discover how the world works, challenge themselves, and learn through play. the mission of the museum is to engage the…

Arts & Culture
11
Greater Omaha Chamber of Commerce

To increase business, employment, and investment in the greater omaha area.

—
12
Nebraska Organ Recovery System

We transform lives through organ and tissue donation.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Easter Seals Nebraska; the most unlike its peers is Allplay Foundation 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

29 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. 29 of the 41 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
29/29
Grantees still filing
23/29
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NEBRASKA ADAPTIVE SPORTS: $71,000 · OtherNEBRASKA ADAPTIVE SPORTSRESPECT: $58,250 · OtherRESPECTHETRA: $48,000 · OtherHETRAFOOD BANK FOR THE HEARTLAND: $43,000 · OtherFOOD BANK FOR THE HEARTLANDCASTING FOR RECOVERY: $35,000 · OtherCASTING FOR RECOVERYNATIONAL KIDNEY FOUNDATION OF NEBRASKA: $30,000 · OtherQLI: $20,000 · OtherOMAHA COMMUNITY PLAYHOUSE: $57,500 · OtherOMAHA COMMUNITY PLAYHOUSENEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETY: $53,000 · OtherNEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETYNEBRASKA CULTURAL ENDOWMENT: $34,250 · OtherNEBRASKA CULTURAL ENDOWMENTKEEP OMAHA BEAUTIFUL INC: $21,000 · Other+12 more: $111,000 · Other+12 moreCHILD SAVING INSTITUTE INC: $117,750 · Human ServicesCHILD SAVING INSTIT…ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA NEBRASKA INC: $44,250 · Human ServicesASSISTANCE LEAGUE O…LEAGUE OF HUMAN DIGNITY INC: $38,500 · Human ServicesLEAGUE OF HUMAN DIG…WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $11,000 · Human ServicesCONNECTED ROOTS CARE CENTER: $10,500 · Human ServicesHOPE CENTER FOR KIDS INC: $84,500 · Youth DevelopmentHOPE CENTER FO…Partnership 4 Kids Inc: $52,000 · Youth DevelopmentPartnership 4 …COMPLETELY KIDS: $23,500 · Youth DevelopmentCOMPLETELY KID…BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS: $6,500 · Youth DevelopmentANGELS AMONG US: $59,725 · HealthANGELS AM…RADIO TALKING BOOK SERVICE INC: $50,525 · HealthRADIO TAL…OUTLOOK ENRICHMENT: $5,000 · Health+1 more: $1,000 · HealthMOSAIC: $99,000 · Housing & ShelterJOSLYN CASTLE TRUST INC: $35,000 · Arts & CultureOPERA OMAHA INC: $22,000 · Arts & CultureSINGOMAHA INC: $16,000 · Arts & CultureALLPLAY FOUNDATION INC: $58,875 · Recreation & Sports
Other$582,000Human Services$222,000Youth Development$166,500Health$116,250Housing & Shelter$99,000Arts & Culture$73,000Recreation & Sports$58,875

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 budgetCHILD SAVING INSTITUTE INC: $117,750 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetMOSAIC: $99,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE CENTER FOR KIDS INC: $84,500 over 9y, 0.5% of budgetNEBRASKA ADAPTIVE SPORTS: $71,000 over 8y, 9.8% of budgetANGELS AMONG US: $59,725 over 8y, 1.5% of budgetALLPLAY FOUNDATION INC: $58,875 over 8y, 11% of budgetOMAHA COMMUNITY PLAYHOUSE: $57,500 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetNEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETY: $53,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetPartnership 4 Kids Inc: $52,000 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetRADIO TALKING BOOK SERVICE INC: $50,525 over 8y, 3.3% of budgetASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA NEBRASKA INC: $44,250 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetFOOD BANK FOR THE HEARTLAND: $43,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetLEAGUE OF HUMAN DIGNITY INC: $38,500 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetJOSLYN CASTLE TRUST INC: $35,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetNEBRASKA CULTURAL ENDOWMENT: $34,250 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetCOMPLETELY KIDS: $23,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetOPERA OMAHA INC: $22,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetKEEP OMAHA BEAUTIFUL INC: $21,000 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetSINGOMAHA INC: $16,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetCASA FOR DOUGLAS COUNTY: $15,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetBOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA 326 MID-AMERICA COUNCIL: $12,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNEBRASKA SHAKESPEARE FESTIVAL INC: $12,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetWOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT: $11,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetHEART MINISTRY CENTER: $10,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS: $6,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetOUTLOOK ENRICHMENT: $5,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetEASTER SEALS NEBRASKA: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 CHILD SAVING INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds MOSAIC ↗
  • Who funds HOPE CENTER FOR KIDS INC ↗
  • Who funds NEBRASKA ADAPTIVE SPORTS ↗
  • Who funds ANGELS AMONG US ↗
  • Who funds ALLPLAY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds OMAHA COMMUNITY PLAYHOUSE ↗
  • Who funds NEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds Partnership 4 Kids Inc ↗
  • Who funds RADIO TALKING BOOK SERVICE INC ↗
  • Who funds ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF OMAHA NEBRASKA INC ↗
  • Who funds FOOD BANK FOR THE HEARTLAND ↗
  • Who funds LEAGUE OF HUMAN DIGNITY INC ↗
  • Who funds JOSLYN CASTLE TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds NEBRASKA CULTURAL ENDOWMENT ↗
  • Who funds COMPLETELY KIDS ↗
  • Who funds OPERA OMAHA INC ↗
  • Who funds KEEP OMAHA BEAUTIFUL INC ↗
  • Who funds SINGOMAHA INC ↗
  • Who funds CASA FOR DOUGLAS COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA 326 MID-AMERICA COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds NEBRASKA SHAKESPEARE FESTIVAL INC ↗
  • Who funds WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT ↗
  • Who funds CONNECTED ROOTS CARE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds HEART MINISTRY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE MIDLANDS ↗
  • Who funds OMAHA PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds OUTLOOK ENRICHMENT ↗

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 FoundationThe Hawks FoundationGilbert M and Martha …The Charles and Mary …Leland J & Dorothy H …Robert B Daugherty Fo…Mutual of Omaha Found…Weitz Family Foundati…Adah K Millard Charit…Suzanne & Walter Scot…Immanuel Community Vi…
The Sherwood FoundationNE39.8× affinity17 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 · The Hawks Foundation · Gilbert M and Martha H Hitchcock Foundation · The Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · Leland J & Dorothy H Olson Charitable Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · Weitz Family Foundation · Adah K Millard Charitable Trust · Suzanne & Walter Scott Foundation · Immanuel Community Vision 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 R Patrick Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from William R Patrick Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    15report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 41 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 William R Patrick’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