· Public charity
Women's Fund of Greater Omaha Inc
The women's fund of greater omaha addresses gender-based inequities in our community through collaboration that identifies, researches, and creates solutions to advance, educate and fund lasting impact.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k6 grants · $201k
- $50k–250k16 grants · $1.7M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA | $228,744 |
| WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT | $225,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES | $175,000 |
| ONE WORLD COMMUNITY CENTERS | $175,000 |
| NEBRASKA COALITION TO END DVSA | $160,000 |
| NEBRASKA AIDS PROJECT | $100,000 |
| IMMIGRANT LEGAL CENTER | $100,000 |
| MAGDALENE OMAHA | $90,000 |
| PROJECT HARMONY | $90,000 |
| BLACK & PINK | $60,000 |
| HEARTLAND FAMILY SERVICE | $55,000 |
| NEBRASKA URBAN INDIAN HEALTH COALITION | $50,000 |
| CENTER FOR HOLISTIC DEVELOPMENT | $50,000 |
| POTTAWATTAMIE COUNTY HEALTH CENTERS | $50,000 |
| NEBRASKA ALLIANCE OF CHILD ADVOCACY CENTERS | $50,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $6.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +79% since the first grant, against +55% for the ones you funded once.
29 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $206k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- OCONEWORLD COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC8× · 2017–2024 · $9.9M · revenue +83%
- CDCHARLES DREW HEALTH CENTER INC7× · 2017–2023 · $3.3M · revenue +58%
- WCWOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT7× · 2018–2024 · $2.2M · revenue +23%
Funded once
- CNCENTRAL NEBRASKA AREA HEALTH CENTERone grant, 2017 · $208k
- FLFRED LEROY HEALTH AND WELLNESS CENTER PONCA TRIBE OF NEone grant, 2017 · $160k
- TRTHREE RIVERS PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENTone grant, 2017 · $133k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.
Public health services
Provide education and leadership to empower people to live safe and healthy.
Improve healthcare by collecting, analyzing, and sharing information about patient safety; and to ensure compliance with the patient safety improvement act.
Family planning and maternal health services.
One omaha empowers people where they live with education, training, and engagement to develop thriving neighborhoods.
To build the capacity of youth serving organizations, service providers, families and community to claim their voice, cultivate healing and take courageous action to improve their overall health and well being.
Heartland community health network exists to support and strengthen its federally qualified health center members through collaboration, information-sharing and integration of administrative, fiscal and clinical operations.
To provide comprehensive outpatient mental health services to over 5400 individuals and their families in a consumer driven person centered delivery system. Approximately 15% of our staff members are our clients who are involved in a…
The NeRHA is a non-profit, grassroots, member-driven organization interested in the health of rural Nebraskans throughout the state. The NeRHA membership works together to identify health concerns of rural Nebraska and find ways to improve…
Northland community health center is committed to providing access to affordable and quality health services.
It is the mission of neighborhood healthsource to improve the health of our communities by providing quality health care services that are affordable and accessible, while advancing health equity for all.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Good Neighbor Community Health Center and the most unlike its peers is The Nebraska Medical Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 40 years old; the field is 22. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
37 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 37 of the 48 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds ONEWORLD COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE HEARTLAND INC ↗
- Who funds CHARLES DREW HEALTH CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP OF WESTERN NEBRASKA ↗
- Who funds PEOPLES FAMILY HEALTH SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds CHOICE FAMILY HEALTH CARE INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY HEALTH SERVICES ↗
- Who funds Midtown Health Center ↗
- Who funds THE MARY LANNING MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA AIDS PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds North Omaha Area Health ↗
- Who funds GOOD NEIGHBOR COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SEXUAL ASSAULT COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HARMONY ↗
- Who funds MAGDALENE OMAHA INC ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA URBAN INDIAN HEALTH COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE FOR OUR NEIGHBORS-NEBRASKA ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA ALLIANCE OF CHILD ADVOCACY CENTERS ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S PHYSICIANS ↗
- Who funds The Nebraska Medical Center ↗
- Who funds SURVIVORS RISING ↗
- Who funds HEARTLAND FAMILY SERVICE ↗
- Who funds BLACK AND PINK INC ↗
- Who funds YouTurn ↗
- Who funds FAMILY PLANNING COUNCIL OF NEBRASKA INC ↗
- Who funds RISE ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR HOLISTIC DEVELOPMENT ↗
- Who funds Nebraska Tribes Addressing Violence Coalition ↗
- Who funds COLLEGE OF SAINT MARY ↗
- Who funds LUTHERAN FAMILY SERVICES OF NE INC ↗
- Who funds YOUTH EMERGENCY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA CHILDREN'S HOME SOCIETY INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: The Sherwood Foundation · The Lozier Foundation · Weitz Family Foundation · Mutual of Omaha Foundation · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · Family Planning Council of Nebraska Inc · United Way of the Midlands · Kim Foundation · Todd and Mary Heistand Family Foundation · Immanuel Community Vision Foundation · Spreetail Foundation · Leland J & Dorothy H Olson Charitable 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 Women's Fund of Greater Omaha 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.
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.