Skip to content
Bartlesville Regional United Way In at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Bartlesville Regional United Way In

Leading the fight to improve the health, education and financial stability of every person in our communities.

$1.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
—
States reached
$186k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Youth Development$3.6MHuman Services$3.0MHealth$1.2MReligion$1.0MCommunity Improvement$504kFood & Nutrition$430kPublic Safety & Disaster$307kHousing & Shelter$45kOther$0
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k12 grants · $1.4M
$112,190
Median grant
—
States reached
$4.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF BARTLESVILLE$186,285
BUILDING BRIDGES OF OKLAHOMA$160,000
FAMILY HEALTHCARE CLINIC$142,000
SAMARITAN COUNSELING & GROWTH CTR$135,000
CATHOLIC CHARITIESMARY MARTHA OUTR$130,000
ELDER CARE$120,000
CHEROKEE AREA COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS$112,190
Individual grant recipient$110,000
AGAPE MISSION$95,000
SALVATION ARMY$90,000
GIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN OKLAHOMA$80,000
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF NOWATA$73,500
Individual grant recipient$40,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
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 (FY17–18, $223k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Youth and Family Services: $3k → 14%Family YMCA of Bartlesville: $110k → 14%Family YMCA of Bartlesville: $110k → 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.
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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10.0M · 25 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

25 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
14

Total granted

$10.0M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-11%
+62%

Still filing today

20%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Youth DevelopmentHuman ServicesHealthReligionArts & CultureEducationOther
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

  • BG
    Boys & Girls Club of Bartlesville
    7× · 2017–2024 · $1.3M
  • EC
    Elder Care
    8× · 2017–2024 · $972k
  • FH
    FAMILY HEALTHCARE CLINIC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $779k

Funded once

  • BA
    BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF BARTLESVILLEgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $186k · revenue +62%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $172k
  • SC
    Samartian Counseling and Growth Center
    one grant, 2022 · $121k
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
Boys and Girls Club of Bartlesville

To enable our young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their potential.

Youth Development
2
Boys & Girls Club of Chelsea Inc

Boys and girls club of chelsea inc is an oklahoma nonprofit corporation whose purpose is to provide educational, personal development for the general public to prevent child abuse.

Youth Development
3
Arbuckle Area Council Boys Scouts of America

The arbuckle area council boys scouts of america is a local council for southern oklahoma. the purpose of the council and scouting is to build and develop characterand high moral values of boys.

—
4
Family Promise of Tulsa County Inc

Poverty alleviation/homelessness prevention

Housing & Shelter
5
My Refuge Inc

An outreach ministry that is focused on serving children and families of bartlesville and dewey. programs include friday night girls night out outreach, tuesday group for boys, men's club for children, along with other ministries.

Human Services
6
Boys & Girls Clubs of Oklahoma County Inc

To inspire and enable all young people, especially those who need us most to reach their full potential as responsible, caring, and productive citizens.

Youth Development
7
Boys & Girls Club of Southwest Alabama Inc

The boys and girls club of southwest alabama actively works with local youth of all backgrounds to develop the qualities needed to become responsible citizens and future leaders in our community.

Youth Development
8
Boys and Girls Clubs of Southeast Idaho Inc

To inspire and enable young people, especially those from disadvantaged circumstances, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible, and caring citizens in the southeast idaho area.

Youth Development
9
Oklahoma Lawyers for Children Inc

To provide legal service and education advocacy for children

Crime & Legal
10
Western Plains Youth and Family Inc

Youth & family services, social service agency as well as foster care services and detention facilities.

Human Services
11
Ok Justice Circle

Uniting voices, healing divides, advancing justice, guided by faith

Human Services
12
Family and Youth Service Center

Family & youth service center, inc. is designed to offer services for youth and families in a convenient and caring environment.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Youth and Family Services Inc; the most unlike its peers is Mary Martha Outreach 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

12 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. 12 of the 39 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
5/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Boys & Girls Club of Bartlesville: $1,305,995 · OtherBoys & Girls Club of BartlesvilleElder Care: $972,000 · OtherElder CareFAMILY HEALTHCARE CLINIC: $779,000 · OtherFAMILY HEALTHCARE CLINICIndividual grant recipient: $660,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSAMARITAN COUNSELING & GROWTH CTR: $582,500 · OtherSAMARITAN COUNSELING & GROWTH CTRThe Salvation Army: $567,000 · OtherThe Salvation ArmyIndividual grant recipient: $522,000 · OtherBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF NOWATA: $491,000 · OtherGIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN OKLAHOMA: $467,004 · OtherAGAPE MISSION: $435,000 · OtherCHEROKEE AREA COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS: $426,743 · OtherBUILDING BRIDGES OF OKLAHOMA: $332,000 · Other+18 more: $2,378,502 · Other+18 moreBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF BARTLESVILLE: $186,285 · Youth DevelopmentGIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN OKLAHOMA INC: $70,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF NOWATA: $60,000 · Youth DevelopmentFAMILY HEALTHCARE CLINIC INC: $280,000 · HealthFAMILY YMCA OF BARTLESVILLE: $220,000 · Human Services+1 more: $3,000 · Human ServicesTHE AGAPE MISSION OF BARTLESVILLE INC: $170,000 · ReligionWESTSIDE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION: $125,133 · Arts & CulturePATHS TO INDEPENDENCE INC: $10,000 · Education
Other$9,918,744Youth Development$316,285Health$280,000Human Services$223,000Religion$170,000Arts & Culture$125,133Education$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFAMILY HEALTHCARE CLINIC INC: $280,000 over 2y, 50% of budgetMary Martha Outreach Inc: $260,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetCHEROKEE AREA COUNCIL OF BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA: $222,400 over 2y, 23% of budgetFAMILY YMCA OF BARTLESVILLE: $220,000 over 2y, 7.1% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF BARTLESVILLE: $186,285 over 1y, 23% of budgetWESTSIDE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION: $125,133 over 2y, 32% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN OKLAHOMA INC: $70,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF NOWATA: $60,000 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetPATHS TO INDEPENDENCE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetYOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES INC: $3,000 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 FAMILY HEALTHCARE CLINIC INC ↗
  • Who funds Mary Martha Outreach Inc ↗
  • Who funds CHEROKEE AREA COUNCIL OF BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY YMCA OF BARTLESVILLE ↗
  • Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF BARTLESVILLE ↗
  • Who funds THE AGAPE MISSION OF BARTLESVILLE INC ↗
  • Who funds WESTSIDE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN OKLAHOMA INC ↗
  • Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF NOWATA ↗
  • Who funds PATHS TO INDEPENDENCE INC ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY PROMISE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES 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.

Lyon FoundationMcAnaw Family Foundat…Jeanalee and Charles …Cresap Family Foundat…Arvest FoundationKenneth G and Diana M…K S Adams Foundation …Bartlesville Communit…Community Food Bank o…American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
Lyon FoundationOK22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Lyon Foundation · McAnaw Family Foundation · Jeanalee and Charles Parsons Foundation · Cresap Family Foundation · Arvest Foundation · Kenneth G and Diana Moon Adams Foundation · K S Adams Foundation Co-Trust · Bartlesville Community Foundation · Community Food Bank of Eastern Oklahoma Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Bartlesville Regional United Way In funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bartlesville Regional United Way In. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 23%
  • Youth and Family Services Inc: 23% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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 39 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.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $1.8M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Bartlesville Regional United Way In’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