Skip to content
Joe & Jean Holliman Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Joe & Jean Holliman Family Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$2.3M
Granted FY2023
5
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$1.1M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Philanthropy$2.3MEnvironment$1.8MRecreation & Sports$900kHuman Services$612kArts & Culture$245kHousing & Shelter$208kHealth$115kReligion$30k
02FY2023 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+2 grants · $2.3M
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MATT AND LESLEY BECKER FOUNDATION$1,125,855
JOE AND JENNIFER POTTS FAMILY FOUNDATION$1,125,855
TULSA BALLET$50,000
HOSPITALITY HOUSE OF TULSA$15,000
HOLLAND HALL$5,000
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 (FY17–23, $557k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HOSPITALITY HOUSE OF TULSA: $15k → 15%HOSPITALITY HOUSE OF TULSA: $5k → 15%HOSPITALITY HOUSE OF TULSA: $5k → 15%OKLAHOMA METHODIST MANOR INC: $500k → 15%OKLAHOMA METHODIST MANOR INC: $32k → 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.

41%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.6M · 5 repeat orgs$3.7M to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2023, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
8

Total granted

$2.6M
$1.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+74%
+84%

Still filing today

80%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 1% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.3M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
Human ServicesArts & CulturePhilanthropyOther
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

  • UW
    UP WITH TREES INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $1.8M · revenue +74%
  • TW
    TRINITY WOODS INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $532k · revenue +12%
  • THE PHILBROOK MUSEUM OF ART INC
    2× · 2017–2019 · $90k · revenue +253%

Funded once

  • AF
    ASBURY FOUNDATIONINVERNESS VILLAGE
    one grant, 2017 · $900k
  • AS
    ASCENSION ST JOHN FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $208k
  • SJ
    ST JOHN MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
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
Pi Beta Phi Foundation of Okc
Philanthropy
2
The Becker Family Trust
—
3
Tulsa Fiduciary Fund

Tulsa fiduciary fund is committed to strengthening the tulsa community and northeastern oklahoma region by making grants to other 501(c)(3) organizations that are focused on improving and revitalizing the community and promoting the…

Philanthropy
4
Oklahoma Newspaper Foundation
Arts & Culture
5
Oklahoma Philharmonic Society Inc

The oklahoma philharmonic society, inc. exists to provide inspiration and joy for the community through orchestral music programming. our vision is to enhance the cultural life of the community, educate future generations, entertain our…

Arts & Culture
6
Phillips Family Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Tulsa Firefighters Benevolence Fund

Provide relief to family members due to death, injury, or illness.

Philanthropy
8
Tulsa Town Hall Endowment Inc

Financial support of Town Hall of Tulsa Corporation

Community Improvement
9
Osteopathic Founders Foundation

The mission of the osteopathic founders foundation is to support osteopathic medical education, to enhance the public's understanding of osteopathic medicine, and to improve the health of the community through projects consistent with the…

Health
10
Museum of World Treasures Inc

To own and operate a museum, curating antiques and collectibles, that provides a gateway to the past that educates, entertains, and inspires lifelong learning

Arts & Culture
11
Tulsa Area United Way

The tulsa area united way unites people and resources to improve lives and strengthen our communities.

—
12
Oklahoma City Beautiful Inc

OKC Beautiful's mission is to lead beautification and environmental stewardship through collaboration, education and advocacy. We have been doing this for over 50 years through volunteers and contributing donors. This directly impacts the…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Oklahoma Inc; the most unlike its peers is Joe and Jennifer Potts Family 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

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 16 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UP WITH TREES INC: $1,825,000 · OtherUP WITH TREES INCASBURY FOUNDATIONINVERNESS VILLAGE: $900,000 · OtherASBURY FOUNDATIONINVERNESS VILLAGEASCENSION ST JOHN FOUNDATION: $207,678 · OtherASCENSION ST JOHN FOUNDATION+7 more: $355,000 · Other+7 moreJOE AND JENNIFER POTTS FAMILY FOUNDATION: $1,125,855 · PhilanthropyJOE AND JENNIFER POTTS FAMILY FOUNDATIONMATT AND LESLEY BECKER FOUNDATION: $1,125,855 · PhilanthropyMATT AND LESLEY BECKER FOUNDATIONTRINITY WOODS INC: $532,000 · Human ServicesTRINITY WO…PHILOS HOSPITALITY INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesTHE PHILBROOK MUSEUM OF ART INC: $90,000 · Arts & CultureTULSA BALLET THEATRE INC: $50,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$3,287,678Philanthropy$2,251,710Human Services$557,000Arts & Culture$140,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUP WITH TREES INC: $1,825,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetJOE AND JENNIFER POTTS FAMILY FOUNDATION: $1,125,855 over 1y, 98% of budgetMATT AND LESLEY BECKER FOUNDATION: $1,125,855 over 1y, 99% of budgetTRINITY WOODS INC: $532,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetTHE PHILBROOK MUSEUM OF ART INC: $90,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetTULSA BALLET THEATRE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetPHILOS HOSPITALITY INC: $25,000 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF OKLAHOMA INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.6% 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.

The Hardesty Family F…Tulsa Community Found…The Oxley FoundationZarrow Families Found…Joe and Jennifer Pott…The Charles & Marion …Flint Family Foundati…Sanford P & Irene F B…Grace & Franklin Bern…The Gelvin FoundationThe Sharna and Irvin …One Gas Foundation Inc
The Hardesty Family Foundation IncOK19.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Hardesty Family Foundation Inc · Tulsa Community Foundation · The Oxley Foundation · Zarrow Families Foundation · Joe and Jennifer Potts Family Foundation · The Charles & Marion Weber Foundation · Flint Family Foundation · Sanford P & Irene F Burnstein Foundation Irene F Burnstein Co-Trustee · Grace & Franklin Bernsen Foundation · The Gelvin Foundation · The Sharna and Irvin Frank Foundation · One Gas Foundation Inc

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 Joe & Jean Holliman Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Joe & Jean Holliman Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 100%
  • Up With Trees Inc: 100% of income from government
  • The Philbrook Museum of Art Inc: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 16 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Joe & Jean Holliman Family’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