Skip to content
Howard Poteet Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Howard Poteet Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$68k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$22k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2025.

Religion$207kHealth$185kCrime & Legal$72kFood & Nutrition$36kHuman Services$35kCommunity Improvement$22kYouth Development$19kPublic Safety & Disaster$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k13 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
$1,751
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH$22,494
Individual grant recipient$22,494
NEIGHBOR-TO-NEIGHBOR$1,752
CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER$1,752
CASA$1,752
PINE BLUFF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT$1,751
DEPAUL USA INC OPPORTUNITY HOUSE$1,751
THE CALL$1,751
PINE BLUFF BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB$1,751
JEFFERSON COUNTY 4-H PROGRAM$1,751
DOLLY PARTON IMAGINATION LIBRARY$1,751
VOICES FOR CHILDREN$1,751
SE AR BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM$1,751
SOAR$1,751
AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS$1,751
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 (FY17–25, $37k) land where the poverty rate runs at 22%, 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%NEIGHBOR-TO-NEIGHBOR: $6k → 22%NEIGHBOR-TO-NEIGHBOR: $5k → 22%NEIGHBOR-TO-NEIGHBOR: $5k → 22%NEIGHBOR-TO-NEIGHBOR: $5k → 22%NEIGHBOR-TO-NEIGHBOR: $5k → 22%NEIGHBOR-TO-NEIGHBOR: $3k → 22%NEIGHBOR-TO-NEIGHBOR: $3k → 22%NEIGHBOR-TO-NEIGHBOR: $3k → 22%NEIGHBOR-TO-NEIGHBOR: $2k → 22%AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS: $2k → 22%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$576k · 14 repeat orgs$38k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +16% since the first grant, against +8% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
2

Total granted

$576k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
+8%

Still filing today

50%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 51% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k 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 ServicesCommunity ImprovementHealthCrime & LegalReligionEnvironmentOther
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

  • NT
    NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $36k · revenue +6%
  • SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN
    2× · 2017–2018 · $27k · revenue +120%
  • TC
    THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF PINE BLUFF
    9× · 2017–2025 · $23k · revenue +107%

Funded once

  • SJ
    SHERIFF JOE PAUL KING MEMORIAL SCHO
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
  • CA
    Christian Aid Ministries
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +8%
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
Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families

Advocating for the development and implementation of data-driven public policy that improves child well-being in arkansas, with a focus on economic security, education, health, early childhood, child welfare, juvenile justice, and racial…

Human Services
2
South Arkansas Children's Coalition

The organization and its volunteers served as advocates for abused and neglected children. the nationwide organization has helped more than two million children.

Civil Rights
3
Casa of North Arkansas

The organization and its volunteers serve as advocates for abused and neglected children.

Civil Rights
4
Shelby County Children's Advocacy Center

Shelby County Children's Advocacy Center, Inc. is a non-profit organization that is dedicated to ending child abuse through education, advocacy, counseling, family support, and the pursuit of justice.

Crime & Legal
5
South Carolina Network of Children's Advocacy Centers

Empowering south carolina communities and children's advocacy centers to deliver a best practice response to child abuse

Youth Development
6
Christian Community Care Clinic

To provide medical care to the uninsured.

Health
7
Advocates for Children and Families

Child and family advocacy related to abuse

Human Services
8
The Children's Advocacy Center of Hamilton County Inc

The cac provides intervention services for children who are victims of severe abuse and advocacy services to their non offending caregivers. this includes forensic interviews, medical exams, therapy, and prevention education. the cac also…

Human Services
9
Legal Aid of Arkansas

To provide legal assistance & housing counseling to the underprivileged citizens of north arkansas.

Crime & Legal
10
Baton Rouge Children's Advocacy Center

Baton rouge children's advocacy center serves abused children and their non-offending family members. services include forensic interviews, therapy services, and a family advocacy support program.

Youth Development
11
Alabama Partnership for Children

To work in partnership with families and organizations to ensure that all alabama children (birth to five) get everything they need to develop to their fullest potential.

Education
12
Opportunity Arkansas Foundation

Renewing the land of opportunity by simplifying government and solving generational problems for the next generation.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arkansas Community Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Dollywood Foundation. 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, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 24 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: $205,371 · OtherFIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCHSAHARA SHRINE HOSPITAL TRANSPORTATI: $135,407 · OtherSAHARA SHRINE HOSPITAL TRANSPORTATISALVATION ARMY: $28,748 · OtherSALVATION ARMYCASA: $23,092 · OtherTHE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF PINE BLUFF: $23,092 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $22,494 · OtherSHRINER'S HOSPITAL SAHAR SHRINE T: $20,000 · OtherPINE BLUFF BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB: $17,157 · Other+6 more: $15,851 · OtherNEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC: $35,670 · Human ServicesTHE CALL: $4,099 · Human ServicesAREA AGENCY ON AGING OF SOUTHEAST AR INC: $1,751 · Human ServicesSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $27,470 · HealthPINE BLUFF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT INC: $21,676 · Community ImprovementGFPB Inc: $4,944 · Community ImprovementVOICES FOR CHILDRENCOURT APPOINTED SPEC ADVOCATES: $23,090 · Crime & LegalARKANSAS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $3,021 · PhilanthropyChristian Aid Ministries: $2,123 · ReligionSOAR Inc: $1,751 · Environment
Other$491,212Human Services$41,520Health$27,470Community Improvement$26,620Crime & Legal$23,090Philanthropy$3,021Religion$2,123Environment$1,751

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 budgetNEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC: $35,670 over 9y, 0.6% of budgetSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $27,470 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF PINE BLUFF: $23,092 over 9y, 1.0% of budgetVOICES FOR CHILDRENCOURT APPOINTED SPEC ADVOCATES: $23,090 over 9y, 1.5% of budgetPINE BLUFF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT INC: $21,676 over 9y, 2.8% of budgetGFPB Inc: $4,944 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CALL: $4,099 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetARKANSAS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $3,021 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChristian Aid Ministries: $2,123 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAREA AGENCY ON AGING OF SOUTHEAST AR INC: $1,751 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 NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC ↗
  • Who funds SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF PINE BLUFF ↗
  • Who funds VOICES FOR CHILDRENCOURT APPOINTED SPEC ADVOCATES ↗
  • Who funds PINE BLUFF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds GFPB Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE CALL ↗
  • Who funds ARKANSAS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Christian Aid Ministries ↗
  • Who funds SOAR Inc ↗
  • Who funds AREA AGENCY ON AGING OF SOUTHEAST AR INC ↗
  • Who funds THE DOLLYWOOD FOUNDATION ↗

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.

Harold S Seabrook TrUnited Way of Southea…Trotter FoundationArkansas Community Fo…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Harold S Seabrook TrAR15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Harold S Seabrook Tr · United Way of Southeast Ark Inc · Trotter Foundation · Arkansas Community Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Howard Poteet Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Howard Poteet 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 →median 0%
  • Shriners Hospitals for Children: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get 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 · 0–40%
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 24 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 Howard Poteet’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