Skip to content
Frederic J & Dorothea Oppenheimer Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Frederic J & Dorothea Oppenheimer Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$260k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$75kInternational$65kEnvironment$65kHealth$55kYouth Development$45kEducation$30kRecreation & Sports$30kArts & Culture$25kOther$0
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$20,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$6.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Palestine Childrens Relief Fund$25,000
Children's Bereavement Ctr of South$20,000
UNRWA$20,000
Believe it Foundation$20,000
El Progresso Memorial Library$20,000
Doctors Without Borders$20,000
Boys and Girls Clubs of San Antonio$20,000
TEAMability$20,000
Christian Assistance Ministry$20,000
Morgan's Wondereland$20,000
San Antonio Metropolitan Ministry$15,000
Girls Inc of San Antonio$15,000
Make a Wish Foundation$15,000
Be Kind San Antonio$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 (FY20–25, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Christian Assistance Ministry: $20k → 16%Girls Inc of San Antonio: $15k → 16%ChildSafe: $10k → 16%ChildSafe: $5k → 16%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 10% of Frederic J & Dorothea Oppenheimer Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Frederic J & Dorothea Oppenheimer Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 15% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

19%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$85k · 3 repeat orgs$350k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +134% since the first grant, against +19% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
10

Total granted

$85k
$90k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+134%
+19%

Still filing today

100%
70%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $260k 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
Recreation & SportsHuman ServicesInternationalEducationHealthEnvironmentOther
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

  • BP
    Brackenridge Park Conservancy
    2× · 2018–2024 · $55k · revenue +29%
  • C
    CHILDSAFE
    2× · 2020–2021 · $15k · revenue +497%
  • A
    AUGUSTHEART
    2× · 2019–2022 · $15k · revenue +134%

Funded once

  • SA
    SAN ANTONIO PHILHARMONICgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue +132%
  • RM
    ROY MAAS' YOUTH ALTERNATIVES INC
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue -19%
  • HC
    HEMISFAIR CONSERVANCYgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +109%
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
San Antonio Automobile Dealers Association Foundation Inc
—
2
Tennis Officials of San Antonio Association
Recreation & Sports
3
San Antonio Medical Foundation

The mission of the san antonio medical foundation is to improvehealth care, advance biomedical science, and enhance communitywell-being by providing leadership & active stewardship of our landand other assets.

Health
4
Ronald Mcdonald House Charities of San Antonio Inc

To provide a safe, caring, and temporary home away from home for the families of children receiving essential medical services in san antonio, texas.

Health
5
San Antonio Report

Publishing a local online news source. We believe a well informed and connected community is essential to making San Antonio a better place to live, work and play.

Arts & Culture
6
Communities in Schools of San Antonio

To surround students with a community of support, empowering them to stay in school and achieve in life.

Education
7
Greater Satx

The mission of greater:satx is to lead the developemnt and diversification of san antonio regional economy through the recruitment and expansion of qualify employers and job producing investments.

—
8
San Antonio Pets Alive Inc

The mission of San Antonio Pets Alive! is to save every adoptable dog and cat in danger of being killed at the City of San Antonio Shelter.

Animals
9
San Antonio Tennis Association

Develop and promote the lifetime sport

—
10
San Antonio Christian School

Partner with families to provide students a christ-centered education while fostering a life of faith and service. the school desires to associate with like-minded teachers, administrators, staff, parents, and students to communicate the…

—
11
Southwest Winners Foundation Inc

The mission of Southwest Winners Foundation is to provide an adaptive and effective learning environment that prepares students for success in the workplace and/or college.

Education
12
Respite Care of San Antonio Inc

Respite Care of San Antonio is dedicated to providing specialized care for children with special needs and complex medical conditions through a General Residential Operation (GRO), Developmental Childcare Center, and Community Programs for…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is San Antonio Metropolitan Ministries Inc; the most unlike its peers is San Antonio Philharmonic. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

20 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. 20 of the 27 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
11/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNRWA: $20,000 · OtherUNRWAChildren's Bereavement Ctr of South: $20,000 · OtherChildren's Bereavement Ctr of SouthEl Progresso Memorial Library: $20,000 · OtherEl Progresso Memorial LibrarySAN ANTONIO METROPOLITAN MINISTRIES INC: $15,000 · OtherSAN ANTONIO METROPOLITAN MINISTRIES INCMake a Wish Foundation: $15,000 · OtherMake a Wish FoundationROY MAAS' YOUTH ALTERNATIVES INC: $10,000 · OtherROY MAAS' YOUTH ALTERNATIVES INCIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientGus Owen Stephens Foundation: $10,000 · OtherGus Owen Stephens FoundationSAN ANTONIO PHILHARMONIC: $15,000 · OtherSAN ANTONIO PHILHARMONICSan Marcos River Foundation: $10,000 · OtherSan Marcos River FoundationBE KIND SAN ANTONIO INC: $10,000 · OtherBE KIND SAN ANTONIO INC+3 more: $15,000 · Other+3 moreBrackenridge Park Conservancy: $54,750 · Recreation & SportsBrackenridge Park Cons…Morgan's Wonderland: $20,000 · Recreation & SportsMorgan's WonderlandHEMISFAIR CONSERVANCY: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsHEMISFAIR CONSERVANCYChristian Assistance Ministry: $20,000 · Human ServicesChristian Ass…CHILDSAFE: $15,000 · Human ServicesCHILDSAFEGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $15,000 · Human ServicesGIRLS INCORPO…PALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND: $25,000 · InternationalPALESTINE C…MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $20,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SA…BELIEVE IT FOUNDATION: $20,000 · HealthBELIEVE I…AUGUSTHEART: $15,000 · HealthAUGUSTHEA…TEAMABILITY INC: $20,000 · EducationUNITED NEGRO COLLEGE FUND INC: $10,000 · EducationBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SAN ANTONIO: $20,000 · Youth Development
Other$170,000Recreation & Sports$84,750Human Services$50,000International$45,000Health$35,000Education$30,000Youth Development$20,000

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 budgetBrackenridge Park Conservancy: $54,750 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetTEAMABILITY INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetChristian Assistance Ministry: $20,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SAN ANTONIO: $20,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBELIEVE IT FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetCHILDSAFE: $15,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetSAN ANTONIO METROPOLITAN MINISTRIES INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetAUGUSTHEART: $15,000 over 2y, 3.2% of budgetROY MAAS' YOUTH ALTERNATIVES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHEMISFAIR CONSERVANCY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetUNITED NEGRO COLLEGE FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBE KIND SAN ANTONIO INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetSan Marcos River Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetSAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTravis Audubon Society Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

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.

San Antonio Area Foun…The Texas Cavaliers C…Mays Family FoundationPryor Myra Stafford C…Faye L & William L Co…Harvey E Najim Charit…Marcia & Otto Koehler…The Charity Ball Asso…Nancy Smith Hurd Foun…Betty Stieren Kelso F…Elizabeth Huth Coates…Keith M Orme and Pat …
San Antonio Area FoundationTX31.8× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: San Antonio Area Foundation · The Texas Cavaliers Charitable Foundation · Mays Family Foundation · Pryor Myra Stafford Char Tr F0030100 · Faye L & William L Cowden Charitable Foundation · Harvey E Najim Charitable Foundation · Marcia & Otto Koehler Foundation · The Charity Ball Association of San Antonio Inc · Nancy Smith Hurd Foundation · Betty Stieren Kelso Foundation · Elizabeth Huth Coates Charitable Foundation of 1992 · Keith M Orme and Pat Vigeon Orme Charitable 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 Frederic J & Dorothea Oppenheimer Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Frederic J & Dorothea Oppenheimer Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report 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 27 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 Frederic J & Dorothea Oppenheimer’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