Skip to content
James and Julie Grissom Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

James and Julie Grissom Foundation

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.

$158k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$69k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Religion$733kHousing & Shelter$53kFood & Nutrition$22kHealth$3kInternational$2kPublic Benefit$200Other$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $80k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $69k
$1,600
Median grant
6
States reached
$255k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH$68,555
ST MICHAEL & ALL ANGELS$32,000
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$20,000
FOOD FOR THE POOR$17,800
HOMELESS ALLIANCE$10,000
REGIONAL FOOD BANK$3,000
SMILE TRAIN$1,600
FINCA$1,500
EPISCOPAL RELIEF & DEVELOPMENT$1,170
OKLAHOMA HEART HOSPITAL$1,000
CITY RESCUE MISSION$500
Individual grant recipient$300
HERITAGE FOUNDATION$200
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 (FY25–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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%EPISCOPAL RELIEF & DEVELOPMENT: $1k → 17%CITY RESCUE MISSION: $500 → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$802k · 5 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +26% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$802k
$1k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+26%
+13%

Still filing today

40%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesFood & NutritionPublic BenefitOther
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

  • SJ
    ST JOHNS EPISCOPAL CHURCH
    6× · 2020–2025 · $447k
  • SM
    ST MICHAEL & ALL ANGELS
    6× · 2020–2025 · $285k
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $34k

Funded once

  • MH
    Magdalene House OKC Inc
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue +13%
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
World Relief Corp of National Association of Evangelicals

To boldly engage the world's greatest crises in partnership with the church.

International
2
Floresta Usa Incorporated

Plant with purpose, a christian nonprofit organization, reverses deforestation and poverty around the world by transforming the lives of the rural poor. we do this through: - watershed restoration & regenerative agriculture - savings…

International
3
City Harvest Inc

To end hunger in communities throughout new york city. (see schedule o)to end hunger in communities throughout new york city. we do this through food rescue and distribution, education, and other practical, innovative solutions.

Food & Nutrition
4
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
5
Interval House

The mission of the organization is to ensure safety and stability for people who are battered, abused, homeless or at risk; to create public awareness about the epidemic of violence; and to mobilize the community to prevent violence and…

Human Services
6
Food for the Hungry Inc

Food for the hungry is a christian humanitarian aid and global development organization that has designed, developed and delivered solutions for more than 50 years so that children, families and communities can flourish. (continued on…

International
7
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
8
Technoserve Inc

Technoserve's mission is to fight poverty by helping people build regenerative farms, businesses, and markets that increase incomes.

International
9
Women for Women International

In countries affected by conflict and war, women for women international (women for women) supports the most marginalized women to earn and save money, improve health and well-being, influence decisions in their home and community, and…

International
10
Management Sciences for Health Inc

(msh) saves lives and improves the health of the world's poorest (see schedule o) and most vulnerable people by closing the gap between knowledge and action in public health.

International
11
Central Pennsylvania Food Bank

Our mission is to solve hunger in central pennsylvania by ensuring that everyone struggling with hunger has access to enough wholesome food every day. we will achieve this bold goal with the help of our generous donors, volunteers and…

Food & Nutrition
12
Church World Service Inc

Church world service, inc. is a private, voluntary faith-based organization with 37 member communions that transformscommunities around the globe through just and sustainable responses to hunger, poverty, displacement and disaster.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Food for the Poor Inc; the most unlike its peers is Smile Train 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

9 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. 9 of the 14 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST JOHNS EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $446,957 · OtherST JOHNS EPISCOPAL CHURCHST MICHAEL & ALL ANGELS: $285,000 · OtherST MICHAEL & ALL ANGELSHABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $34,000 · Other+3 more: $2,900 · OtherFOOD FOR THE POOR INC: $18,800 · InternationalFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC: $1,500 · InternationalTHE HOMELESS ALLIANCE INC: $17,000 · Housing & ShelterMagdalene House OKC Inc: $1,000 · Housing & ShelterREGIONAL FOOD BANK OF OKLAHOMA INC: $3,000 · Food & NutritionEPISCOPAL RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT: $1,170 · Human ServicesCITY RESCUE MISSION INC: $500 · Human ServicesTHE HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $200 · Public Benefit
Other$768,857International$20,300Housing & Shelter$18,000Food & Nutrition$3,000Human Services$1,670Public Benefit$200

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 budgetFOOD FOR THE POOR INC: $18,800 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HOMELESS ALLIANCE INC: $17,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetREGIONAL FOOD BANK OF OKLAHOMA INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSMILE TRAIN INC: $1,600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMagdalene House OKC Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCITY RESCUE MISSION 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization James and Julie Grissom Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from James and Julie Grissom Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Food for the Poor Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get 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 · 0–5%
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 14 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 James and Julie Grissom’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