Skip to content

· Private foundation

Foundation For Community Partnership Inc

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.

$37k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it funds
0191% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$132kHuman Services$38kHealth$25kFood & Nutrition$7kCivil Rights$5kHousing & Shelter$5kPhilanthropy$4kInternational$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$633k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Remnant Life$9,600
Ronald McDonald House$5,000
Habitat for Humanity$5,000
Make A Wish$5,000
Mend Medical Services$2,500
Catholic Charities$2,500
Foundation for Public Schools$2,500
Individual grant recipient$2,400
Akouo Missions$1,500
Annas House Foundation$1,000
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 (FY21–25, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%Annas House Foundation: $3k → 16%Annas House Foundation: $1k → 16%Emergency Infant Services: $3k → 15%Family and Childrens Services: $3k → 15%Family and Childrens Services: $2k → 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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$225k · 14 repeat orgs$29k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +15% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
9

Total granted

$225k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
0%

Still filing today

57%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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 ServicesReligionHealthYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • TM
    THE MESH OBJECTIVE INC
    5× · 2020–2025 · $22k · revenue +25%
  • MF
    MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF OKLAHOMA INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $15k · revenue +28%
  • MM
    MEND MEDICAL SERVICES INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $8k · revenue +15%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
  • IG
    International Generosity Foundation
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
  • TULSA DREAM CENTER INC
    one grant, 2023 · $3k · revenue -49%
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
Family Hope House Inc

Family Hope House empowers families through therapy, education, and advocacy. As Oklahoma's sole adoption competent mental health agency, we support foster and adoptive children for lasting stability and success.

Health
2
111 Tulsa Inc

111Tulsa exists to mobilize the local church to see that no child is without a family in Tulsa County.

—
3
Tulsa Casa Inc

Tulsa casa is organized to speak for the best interests of abused and neglected children in court. we promote and support volunteer representation for the children in an effort to provide each child a safe, permanent, nurturing home.

Civil Rights
4
Tulsa Day Center Inc

To serve those who are experiencing or at risk for homelessness.

Housing & Shelter
5
The Parent Child Ctr of Tulsa Inc

To prevent child abuse and neglect through education, treatment, and advocacy. the parent child center of tulsa (pcct) has been serving the tulsa community and surrounding areas since 1990. in 2024, pcct served more than 96,000 infants,…

—
6
Family Promise of Tulsa County Inc

Poverty alleviation/homelessness prevention

Housing & Shelter
7
Harvest House Outreach Inc

Empowering the poor and transforming lives in northeast oklahoma, one guest at a time . . . since 1996.

Food & Nutrition
8
Transitional Living Centers of Oklahoma Inc

Assist in preparing homeless and near homeless women in the skills to care for their children and enable them to move toward self-sufficiency.

Housing & Shelter
9
Family Safety Center Inc

The family safety center exists to promote safety and justice in tulsa county through co-located multi-disciplinary services that offer protection, hope and healing to victims of intimate partner and family violence, sexual assault,…

Crime & Legal
10
City Rescue Mission Inc

Our mission is to lead our community by serving people experiencing or at risk of homelessness with help, hope, and healing, in the spirit of excellence, under the call of christ.

Human Services
11
Crossover Health Services Inc

Crossover health services (chs) envisions a christian healthcare movement where faith, strong relationships, and shared resources drive community restoration and eliminate health disparities. we believe that healthcare is a right, not a…

Health
12
Tulsa Advocates for the Protection of Children

To improve the lives of children and youth in oklahoma's child welfare system by providing resources and building community.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tulsa Dream Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Mesh Objective 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 26 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
6/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

REMNANT LIFE INC: $106,833 · OtherREMNANT LIFE INCIndividual grant recipient: $27,501 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF OKLAHOMA INC: $15,000 · OtherMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF OKLAHOMA INCRonald McDonald House Charities of Tulsa: $10,000 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF OKLAHOMA CITY INC: $7,500 · Other+14 more: $43,440 · Other+14 moreTHE MESH OBJECTIVE INC: $22,000 · ReligionTHE MESH O…IRON GATE INC: $2,500 · ReligionIRON GATE …Family & Childrens Services Inc: $4,050 · Human ServicesTHE ANNA'S HOUSE FOUNDATION: $3,500 · Human ServicesEmergency Infant Services Inc: $2,500 · Human ServicesMEND MEDICAL SERVICES INC: $7,500 · HealthTULSA DREAM CENTER INC: $2,500 · Youth Development
Other$210,274Religion$24,500Human Services$10,050Health$7,500Youth Development$2,500

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 budgetTHE MESH OBJECTIVE INC: $22,000 over 5y, 7.2% of budgetMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF OKLAHOMA INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetRonald McDonald House Charities of Tulsa: $10,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF OKLAHOMA CITY INC: $7,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMEND MEDICAL SERVICES INC: $7,500 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetLITTLE LIGHT HOUSE INC: $6,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetFamily & Childrens Services Inc: $4,050 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ANNA'S HOUSE FOUNDATION: $3,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTULSA DREAM CENTER INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEmergency Infant Services Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIRON GATE INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetA NEW LEAF INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% 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 THE MESH OBJECTIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF OKLAHOMA INC ↗
  • Who funds Ronald McDonald House Charities of Tulsa ↗
  • Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF OKLAHOMA CITY INC ↗
  • Who funds MEND MEDICAL SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds LITTLE LIGHT HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds Family & Childrens Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE ANNA'S HOUSE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds TULSA DREAM CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds Emergency Infant Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds IRON GATE INC ↗
  • Who funds A NEW LEAF 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.

Tulsa Community FoundationOK20.5× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tulsa Community Foundation · Coretz Family Foundation · Common Bond Foundation · Edward & Helen Bartlett Foundation · Flint Family Foundation · Maxine and Jack Zarrow Family Foundation · The Sharna and Irvin Frank Foundation · El and Thelma Gaylord Foundation · The Anne and Henry Zarrow Foundation · Je and le Mabee Foundation Inc · Don & Barbara Thornton Family Foundation · John W Marshall and Jerry E Marshall Foundation C/O R Blake Atkins

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 Foundation For Community Partnership Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Foundation For Community Partnership Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 90%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Family & Childrens Services Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
9get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
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 26 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 Foundation For Community Partnership’s filings →

More from the funding graph