· Private foundation
M D Jirous and Barbara Jirous Foundation Inc
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 87% of M D JIROUS AND BARBARA JIROUS FOUNDATION INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k87 grants · $170k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $97k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $285k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OETA | $100,000 |
| PHSAA INC | $85,000 |
| CHEROKEE HISTORY CENTER | $50,000 |
| PIVOT | $50,000 |
| OKLAHOMA BAPTIST HOMES FOR CHILDREN | $30,000 |
| INTERGRIS HEALTH FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $12,000 |
| PONCA CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS | $10,000 |
| PERRY WRESTLING FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| OK END HOMELESSNESS | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $8,000 |
| PUTNAM CITY SCHOOLS | $7,000 |
| NORTHERN OKLAHOMA COLLEGE | $5,777 |
| CROSSING CHRISTIAN SCHOOL | $5,500 |
| JESUS HOUSE | $5,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $210k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 95% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +32% since the first grant, against +21% for the ones you funded once.
135 repeat relationships — 82 still active in FY2024, 53 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $76k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- IHINTEGRIS Health Foundation Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $125k · revenue +16%
- CSCHEROKEE STRIP HISTORICAL SOCIETY3× · 2020–2022 · $112k · revenue +102% · 42% of their budget
PIVOT INC6× · 2018–2024 · $110k · revenue +288%
Funded once
FRIENDS OF OETA INCone grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue +1%- PHPERRY HIGH SCHOOL ALUMNIone grant, 2018 · $75k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $50k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The State Chamber is a statewide membership organization. Our purpose is to be the unified voice of business and the most effective advocacy organization at the State Capitol.
Serving the needs of the whole child, including education, safety, environment, health, and well-being.
To promote the flourishing of the people of oklahoma by advancing principles and policies that support free enterprise, limited government, personal responsibility, and individual initiative.
We are the leading advocate for okcps. we strengthen our schools through community investment, strategic partnerships, and innovative programs.
The OSSAA will serve member schools by providing leadership in the development, supervision, and conduct of co-curricular activities, which enrich the educational experiences of high school students. It will provide for equitable…
To provide information to citizens. The organization encourages the utilization and developement of the State of Oklahomas resourses.
To support the oklahoma city community foundation by supporting the national cowboy and western heritage museum.
Oklahoma Military Heritage Foundation, DBA Oklahoma Military Hall of Fame Foundation, honors the men and women of Oklahoma, living and deceased, who serve or have served in the Uniformed Services of the United States with records of…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Positive Tomorrows Inc and the most unlike its peers is Honoring Americas Warriors Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 23 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
35 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 35 of the 235 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds INTEGRIS Health Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CHEROKEE STRIP HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds PIVOT INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF OETA INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds OKLAHOMA BAPTIST HOMES FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds Jesus House Inc ↗
- Who funds CITY RESCUE MISSION INC ↗
- Who funds REGIONAL FOOD BANK OF OKLAHOMA INC ↗
- Who funds Charles Haskell Elementary PTO Inc ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Oklahoma City Community Foundation Inc · Inasmuch Foundation · American Fidelity Foundation · The Merrick Foundation · El and Thelma Gaylord Foundation · Communities Foundation of Oklahoma · Robert Glenn Rapp Foundation · Rainbolt Family Foundation · Fred Jones Family Foundation · The Samuel Roberts Noble Foundation · Love Family Affiliated Fund of Occf Inc · Servant Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization M D Jirous and Barbara Jirous Foundation Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Pivot Inc — 2% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.