Lane Thomas Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814544601
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Omaha, NE, USA
Phone
4022005830
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$482,091
Expenses
$151,490
Assets
$7,501,413
Liabilities
$16,855

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Matthew Graves (Chairman)
  • Melissa Graves (Vice Chairman)
  • Diane Compardo (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Lane Thomas Foundation was established to give honor and light to Lane's life. The Foundation is dedicated to supporting families of children needing life-saving transplants.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Lane Thomas Foundation provided $125,871 in non-medical financial assistance to support 25 families of children undergoing solid organ or bone marrow transplants, allowing the parents to focus on their child while keeping the family together. Families often must travel from out of state to obtain life-saving medical services. They incur duplicate living expenses while they are away from their home and often must leave their job due to extended periods of time they must spend in Omaha. The Lane Thomas Foundation assists the families with expenses at home (mortgage/rent, auto payment, auto insurance, cell phone, utilities) while the child is in the hospital during their transplant journey.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 87
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 35.2%; rating input score 35
  • Program expense ratio: 84.1%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $60.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 68.6%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 49.52; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.3% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -27.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 35.2% of revenue deployed · 84.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $127K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2017 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 35/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 48/100.