Skip to content
Oberlin College at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Oberlin College

Oberlin College and Conservatory educate students for lives of intellectual, musical and artistic rigor and breadth, sustained inquiry, creativity and innovation, and leadership.

$111M
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$63k
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 2025.

Environment$721kHuman Services$359kPublic Safety & Disaster$321kEducation$159kFood & Nutrition$59kYouth Development$8k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $256,066, the rows itemized in this filing. The $111,342,784 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $111,086,718 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $129k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $114k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.2B
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Oberlin Unitarian Universalist Fell$63,000
City Of Oberlin$50,708
Oberlin Early Childhood Center$38,000
Western Reserve Land Conservancy$35,000
NATURAL AREAS LAND CONSERVANCY$25,000
Hispanic Ministries of Tuscarawas County$10,600
Village Family Farms Foundation$10,500
Providing Oberlin with Efficiency Responsibility (POWER)$10,000
Our Family (Fathers and Mothers Involved in Local Youth)$6,758
City Fresh$6,500
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, $479k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Hispanic Ministries of Tuscarawas County: $11k → 12%Oberlin Early Childhood Center: $38k → 17%Oberlin Community Services Center: $62k → 13%Oberlin Early Childhood Center: $44k → 13%Oberlin Early Childhood Center: $38k → 13%OBERLIN EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $38k → 13%Oberlin Early Childhood Center: $38k → 13%Oberlin Early Childhood Center: $38k → 13%OBERLIN EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $38k → 13%Oberlin Early Childhood Center: $38k → 13%OBERLIN EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $38k → 13%Oberlin Community Services Center: $20k → 13%OBERLIN COMMUNITY SERVICES CENTER: $19k → 13%OBERLIN COMMUNITY SERVICES CENTER: $13k → 13%Kendal at Oberlin: $8k → 13%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $13M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 9 regions, all to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

East Asia and the Pacific$5.5M · 44% · 149 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS

South Asia$1.7M · 13% · 31 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS

Sub-Saharan Africa$1.4M · 11% · 17 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$1.3M · 10% · 21 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS

North America (Canada and Mexico)$770k · 6% · 18 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS

South America$714k · 6% · 12 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS

Russia and Neighboring States$486k · 4% · 6 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS

Central America and the Caribbean$478k · 4% · 7 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS

Middle East and North Africa$279k · 2% · 5 people

Stated purpose: SCHOLARSHIPS

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 11 repeat orgs$193k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +68% since the first grant, against +1% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
8

Total granted

$1.4M
$84k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+68%
+1%

Still filing today

64%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 57% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $109k 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 ServicesEnvironmentCommunity ImprovementEducationAnimalsOther
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

  • OC
    OBERLIN COMMUNITY SERVICES COUNCIL
    4× · 2018–2021 · $113k · revenue +301%
  • WR
    WESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY
    4× · 2019–2025 · $90k · revenue +57%
  • PO
    PROVIDING OBERLIN WITH EFFICIENCY RESPONSIBLY
    4× · 2019–2025 · $57k · revenue +188% · 30% of their budget

Funded once

  • S
    Sunbolt
    one grant, 2022 · $16k
  • SC
    SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATES LTD
    one grant, 2023 · $16k
  • REWILD
    one grant, 2024 · $15k · revenue +1%
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
Lutheran Outdoor Ministries in Ohio

To inspire people to embrace their callings in creation and community by connecting people with nature and faith.

—
2
Owl Creek Conservancy

Conserving farmlands, stream corridors, aquifer and watershed protection areas, wildlife habitats, woodlands, scenic vistas and ecologically sensitive areas of environmental, historical and community importance in knox county ohio and…

Environment
3
Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund

Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.

Environment
4
Ohio County & Independent Agricultural Societies
Food & Nutrition
5
Central Ohio Workers Center Inc

The Central Ohio Worker Center is a non-profit organization that educates, empowers, and advocates for and with low-wage and immigrant workers in Central Ohio.

Civil Rights
6
Ohio Land Bank Association

Supporting the work of and advocating on behalf of all county land reutilization corporations, commonly known as land banks, across ohio. with 61 of ohios 88 counties having land banks, a clear need has emerged for a statewide association…

Environment
7
The Organic Center Inc

The organic center's mission is to conduct and convene credible, evidence-based science on the environmental and health effects of organic food and farming and communicate the findings to the public. we will achieve our mission through: -…

Environment
8
The Ohio Environmental Council

To protect the environment and health of all ohio communities through legal and policy advocacy, decision-maker accountability, and civic engagement.

Environment
9
Ohio Federation of Soil & Water Conservation Districts

Soil & water conservation

—
10
West Creek Conservancy

Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…

Environment
11
Ohio Housing Council

To advocate and educate on behalf of our members to increase the quality and supply of affordable housing in the state of ohio, and to provide our members with current legislative awareness, a forum for voicing legislative and programmatic…

Community Improvement
12
North Central Ohio Land Conservancy Inc

Protecting natural areas in Ohio through conservation easements and public education regarding the importance of natural areas.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Western Reserve Land Conservancy; the most unlike its peers is Hispanic Ministries of Tuscarawas County 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

12 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. 12 of the 23 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF OBERLIN: $577,830 · OtherCITY OF OBERLINShagbark Haven LLC: $89,093 · OtherShagbark Haven LLCOberlin Unitarian Universalist Fell: $63,000 · OtherOberlin Unitarian Universalist Fell+9 more: $111,970 · Other+9 moreOBERLIN EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $347,679 · Human ServicesOBERLIN EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTEROBERLIN COMMUNITY SERVICES COUNCIL: $113,371 · Human ServicesOBERLIN COMMUNITY SERVICES COUNCI…+2 more: $18,100 · Human ServicesWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $89,988 · EnvironmentWESTERN RESERVE …City Fresh: $61,500 · EnvironmentCity FreshPROVIDING OBERLIN WITH EFFICIENCY RESPONSIBLY: $57,000 · EnvironmentPROVIDING OBERLI…NATURAL AREAS LAND CONSERVANCY: $25,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL AREAS LA…FOREST CITY FOOD COLLECTIVE: $37,181 · Community ImprovementOUR FAMILY FATHERS AND MOTHERS INVOLVED IN LOCAL YOUTH: $20,117 · EducationREWILD: $15,000 · Animals
Other$841,893Human Services$479,150Environment$233,488Community Improvement$37,181Education$20,117Animals$15,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetOBERLIN EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $347,679 over 9y, 8.6% of budgetOBERLIN COMMUNITY SERVICES COUNCIL: $113,371 over 4y, 6.3% of budgetWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $89,988 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCity Fresh: $61,500 over 3y, 8.7% of budgetPROVIDING OBERLIN WITH EFFICIENCY RESPONSIBLY: $57,000 over 4y, 30% of budgetFOREST CITY FOOD COLLECTIVE: $37,181 over 3y, 15% of budgetNATURAL AREAS LAND CONSERVANCY: $25,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetOUR FAMILY FATHERS AND MOTHERS INVOLVED IN LOCAL YOUTH: $20,117 over 3y, 11% of budgetREWILD: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKENDAL AT OBERLIN: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOBERLIN HISTORICAL AND IMPROVEMENT ORGANIZATION: $7,096 over 1y, 1.0% 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 OBERLIN EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER ↗
  • Who funds OBERLIN COMMUNITY SERVICES COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds WESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds City Fresh ↗
  • Who funds PROVIDING OBERLIN WITH EFFICIENCY RESPONSIBLY ↗
  • Who funds FOREST CITY FOOD COLLECTIVE ↗
  • Who funds NATURAL AREAS LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds OUR FAMILY FATHERS AND MOTHERS INVOLVED IN LOCAL YOUTH ↗
  • Who funds REWILD ↗
  • Who funds HISPANIC MINISTRIES OF TUSCARAWAS COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds KENDAL AT OBERLIN ↗
  • Who funds OBERLIN HISTORICAL AND IMPROVEMENT ORGANIZATION ↗

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.

Community Foundation …The Nord Family Found…The Nordson Corporati…Amazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation of Lorain CountyOH17.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Lorain County · The Nord Family Foundation · The Nordson Corporation Foundation · 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 Oberlin College funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Oberlin College. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 23 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 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 Oberlin College’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