Skip to content

· Public charity

Oklahoma Tennis Foundation

OK Tennis Foundation changes lives across Oklahoma by sharing tennis and promoting education, providing grants and scholarships, supporting organizations and programs that enhance lives through tennis, and celebrating and promoting tennis throughout Oklahoma communities.

$263k
Granted FY2025still arriving
25
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Recreation & Sports$270kArts & Culture$28k
02FY2025 · 25 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 25 grants below total $170,100, the rows itemized in this filing. The $262,600 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $92,500 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 $10k18 grants · $73k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $97k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$428k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FIRST SERVE OKC FOUNDATION$25,102
FIRST SERVE TULSA FOUNDATION$19,500
PLAY IT FORWARD TENNIS FND$12,000
GUTHRIE PUBLIC SCHOOLS$10,000
BRITTON CHRISTIAN CHURCH TENNIS ACADEMY$10,000
CENTER FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH PHYSICAL CHAALLENGERS$10,000
PAULS VALLEY PARKS FOUNDATION$10,000
ELK CITY TENNIS BOOSTER CLUB$9,044
CROSSOVER COMMUNITY IMPACT TENNIS PROGRAM$6,000
PHILCREST HILLS TENNIS CLUB$5,000
SPECIAL OLYMPICS OF OK INC$5,000
COUNTY OF POTTAWATOMIE ABA SPS DIST 1-93$5,000
NORTH AMERICAN INDIAN TENNIS ASSOC$5,000
OK WESLELYAN UNIVERSITY$5,000
ENID TENNIS ASSOCIATION OF GREATER ENID$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 (FY25–25, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, 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%CROSSOVER COMMUNITY IMPACT TENNIS PROGRAM: $6k → 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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$277k · 11 repeat orgs$191k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +6% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 18 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
11

Total granted

$277k
$88k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+6%
0%

Still filing today

36%
18%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 39% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $103k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’22’23’24’25
Recreation & SportsEducationHealthHuman ServicesOther
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

  • OW
    OKLAHOMA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $25k · revenue +17%
  • Special Olympics Oklahoma Inc
    2× · 2024–2025 · $15k · revenue +6%
  • PH
    Philcrest Hills Tennis Club
    2× · 2024–2025 · $10k · revenue +4%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $28k
  • OW
    OKLAHOMA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY TENNIS
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • TC
    THE CENTER FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH PHYSICAL
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
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
Oklahoma District Tennis Association Inc

To promote and develop the growth of tennis in the State of Oklahoma

Recreation & Sports
2
Tennis Officials of San Antonio Association
Recreation & Sports
3
Oklahoma Secondary School Activities Association

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…

—
4
Crossroads Tennis Association
—
5
Oklahoma City Golf and Country Club

Club organized for pleasure & recreation

—
6
Bush Tennis Center

The mission of the Center is to give everyone the opportunity to experience the game of tennis regardless of physical, financial or geographical barriers.

—
7
Cowboy Athletics Inc

To support first the entire department of intercollegiate athletics at oklahoma state university and second other educational programs at osu. [continued on schedule o] the mission of the following three wholly owned limited liability…

Recreation & Sports
8
Ucf Athletics Association Inc

To provide opportunity to young people and develop leaders for industry, philanthropy, education and the community through the intercollegiate athletic experience.

Education
9
Oklahoma Charge Volleyball

Over six hundred 700 girls learning volleyball skills with benefits to them in leadership learning to work well with others maintaining exercise and good health and working toward athletic scholarships for some.

Recreation & Sports
10
United States Tennis Association Southwest Section Inc

Our mission is to promote and develop the growth of tennis in the southwest

—
11
Enid Sports Association

Enid Sports Association is a non-profit organization founded in 2017 to develop and grow recreational and competitive sports, recognize achievement and promote healthy lifestyles through strengthened community values.

Recreation & Sports
12
The Woodlands Christian Academy

TWCA is an independent, Christ-centered college preparatory school that integrates learning with biblical faith and challenges our students to reach their highest potential - intellectually, creatively, physically, and socially - for the…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is First Serve Okc Foundation; the most unlike its peers is United States Tennis Association Incorporated. 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 40 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

HENRYETTA TENNIS ASSOCIATION: $48,114 · OtherHENRYETTA TENNIS ASSOCIATIONBRITTON CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $41,755 · OtherBRITTON CHRISTIAN CHURCHFIRST SERVE OKC FOUNDATION: $33,655 · OtherFIRST SERVE OKC FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $28,403 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSANTA FE FAMILY LIFE CENTER: $25,000 · OtherSANTA FE FAMILY LIFE CENTERPLAY IT FORWARD: $14,371 · OtherFIRST SERVE TULSA FOUNDATION: $13,878 · Other+26 more: $158,877 · Other+26 moreFIRST SERVE OKC FOUNDATION: $40,102 · Recreation & SportsFIRST SERVE OK…Special Olympics Oklahoma Inc: $15,465 · Recreation & SportsSpecial Olympi…OKLAHOMA DISTRICT TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC: $5,000 · Recreation & SportsOKLAHOMA DISTR…OKLAHOMA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY: $24,937 · EducationCARLTON LANDING ACADEMY INC: $3,200 · EducationTHE CENTER FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH PHYSICAL CHALLENGES: $10,000 · HealthCROSSOVER COMMUNITY IMPACT INC: $6,000 · Human Services
Other$364,053Recreation & Sports$60,567Education$28,137Health$10,000Human Services$6,000

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 budgetFIRST SERVE OKC FOUNDATION: $40,102 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetOKLAHOMA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY: $24,937 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSpecial Olympics Oklahoma Inc: $15,465 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH PHYSICAL CHALLENGES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPhilcrest Hills Tennis Club: $10,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetUNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCARLTON LANDING ACADEMY INC: $3,200 over 1y, 0.3% 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 FIRST SERVE OKC FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds OKLAHOMA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Special Olympics Oklahoma Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE CENTER FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH PHYSICAL CHALLENGES ↗
  • Who funds Philcrest Hills Tennis Club ↗
  • Who funds CROSSOVER COMMUNITY IMPACT INC ↗
  • Who funds OKLAHOMA DISTRICT TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds CARLTON LANDING ACADEMY INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Carlton Landing Academy Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Oklahoma Tennis Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Oklahoma Tennis Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 40 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 Oklahoma Tennis’ filings →

More from the funding graph