Skip to content

· Public charity

Central Oklahoma Economic Development District

Economic development in the following 7 counties Hughes, Lincoln, Okfuskee, Pawnee, Payne, Pottawatomie and Seminole

$4.6M
Granted FY2024still arriving
59
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$928k
Largest
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Food & Nutrition$14MPublic Benefit$3.5MCommunity Improvement$2.9MPublic Safety & Disaster$1.9MEnvironment$1.5MHuman Services$320kRecreation & Sports$316kCrime & Legal$178kOther$0
02FY2024 · 59 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 59 grants below total $4,377,403, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,606,529 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $229,126 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

  • Under $10k4 grants · $28k
  • $10k–50k30 grants · $752k
  • $50k–250k23 grants · $1.8M
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.8M
$45,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$6.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Project HEART Inc$928,257
New Age Inc$902,644
City of Prague$100,000
City of Holdenville$100,000
Town of Kendrick$100,000
Lincoln County Dist #2$100,000
City of Wewoka$100,000
Town of Boley$99,000
City of Stroud$98,566
Town of Paden$96,000
Okfuskee County Dist #1$85,000
Pawnee County Dist #2$78,847
Okfuskee County Dist #3$75,000
City of Tecumseh$75,000
City of Pawnee$74,100
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 (FY17–24, $6.8M) land where the poverty rate runs at 23%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%New Age Inc: $905k → 23%New Age Inc: $904k → 23%New Age Inc: $903k → 23%New Age Inc: $849k → 23%New Age Inc: $825k → 23%New Age Inc: $772k → 23%New Age Inc: $716k → 23%New Age Inc: $716k → 23%Davenport Senior Citizens: $21k → 15%Davenport Senior Citizens: $18k → 15%Davenport Senior Citizens: $16k → 15%Davenport Senior Citizens: $15k → 15%Davenport Senior Citizens: $15k → 15%Davenport Senior Citizens: $14k → 15%Town of Stuart: $47k → 23%Davenport Senior Citizens: $14k → 15%Town of Stuart: $18k → 23%Davenport Senior Citizens: $13k → 15%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$30M · 58 repeat orgs$840k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +9% since the first grant, against +8% for those funded once.

58 repeat relationships: 43 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

58
20

Total granted

$30M
$690k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+9%
+8%

Still filing today

5%
5%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $149k 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
Human ServicesFood & NutritionCrime & LegalCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • PH
    PROJECT HEART INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $7.0M · revenue +10% · 31% of their budget
  • NA
    New Age Project Inc
    8× · 2017–2024 · $6.7M · revenue +9% · 70% of their budget
  • LEGAL AID SERVICES OF OKLAHOMA INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $178k · revenue +138%

Funded once

  • LC
    Lincoln County
    one grant, 2017 · $90k
  • CO
    Central Oklahoma Economic Development District
    one grant, 2023 · $58k · revenue +8%
  • CO
    City of Lone Chimney
    one grant, 2023 · $50k
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 83 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/7
Grantees still filing
4/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Total grants 5000: $5,920,586 · OtherTotal grants 5000Lincoln County Dist #3: $820,234 · OtherOkfuskee County Dist #1: $661,578 · Other+75 more: $9,662,327 · Other+75 morePROJECT HEART INC: $6,986,112 · Food & NutritionPROJECT HEART INCNew Age Project Inc: $6,654,847 · Human ServicesNew Age Project Inc+1 more: $124,437 · Human ServicesLEGAL AID SERVICES OF OKLAHOMA INC: $177,977 · Crime & LegalCentral Oklahoma Economic Development District: $58,071 · Community Improvement
Other$17,064,725Food & Nutrition$6,986,112Human Services$6,779,284Crime & Legal$177,977Community Improvement$58,071

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPROJECT HEART INC: $6,986,112 over 8y, 31% of budgetNew Age Project Inc: $6,654,847 over 8y, 70% of budgetLEGAL AID SERVICES OF OKLAHOMA INC: $177,977 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetDAVENPORT SENIOR CITIZENS: $124,437 over 8y, 26% of budgetSENIOR CITIZENS OF SHAWNEE INC: $121,481 over 8y, 8.7% of budgetYale Senior Citizens Inc: $99,542 over 7y, 53% of budgetCentral Oklahoma Economic Development District: $58,071 over 1y, 1.1% 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 PROJECT HEART INC ↗
  • Who funds New Age Project Inc ↗
  • Who funds LEGAL AID SERVICES OF OKLAHOMA INC ↗
  • Who funds DAVENPORT SENIOR CITIZENS ↗
  • Who funds SENIOR CITIZENS OF SHAWNEE 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.

American Kennel Club Companion Animal Recovery CorporationNY12.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Kennel Club Companion Animal Recovery Corporation · Center for Technology and Civic Life

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 Central Oklahoma Economic Development District funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Central Oklahoma Economic Development District. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 13%
  • Legal Aid Services of Oklahoma Inc: 13% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report 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 83 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 Central Oklahoma Economic Development District’s filings →

More from the funding graph