Skip to content

· Private foundation

Ronald O Thomas Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$228k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Animals$400kEducation$259kCommunity Improvement$114kPhilanthropy$66kRecreation & Sports$62kPublic Benefit$52kHealth$29kArts & Culture$26kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $26k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $51k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $150k
$5,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF BAXTER SPRINGS - ANIMAL SHE$150,000
SEK HUMANE SOCIETY$25,000
OUTSIDE THE WIRE FOUNDATION$16,450
UMASS-AMHERST-THOMAS FOUNDATION$10,000
POINTFORWARD$6,500
WESLEY HOUSE$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
KANSAS SPECIAL OLYMPICS$2,500
BAXTER SPRINGS PRESBYTERIAN PEO$2,500
GUARDIANS OF THE CHILDREN$2,000
GIRL SCOUTS$1,806
ALZHEIMERS ASSOCIATION$1,100
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 (FY20–20, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, 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%SAFEHOUSE CRISIS CENTER: $3k → 18%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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
MA
MO
AZ
KS
AR
OK
TX
FL
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.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$708k · 21 repeat orgs$385k to everyone else

21 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
24

Total granted

$708k
$209k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+0%
+60%

Still filing today

38%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 23% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $176k 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
AnimalsCommunity ImprovementArts & CultureFood & NutritionEducationRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • PA
    PROUD ANIMAL LOVERS SHELTER INC
    3× · 2021–2024 · $11k · revenue +39%
  • AT
    AT THE TABLE INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $10k · revenue +19%
  • JH
    Joplin Humane Society Inc
    2× · 2018–2022 · $6k · revenue +31%

Funded once

  • BS
    BAXTER SPRINGS USD 508
    one grant, 2017 · $59k
  • CO
    CITY OF BAXTER SPRINGS - DOG PARK
    one grant, 2021 · $40k
  • FF
    FRANKIE'S FRIENDS INC
    one grant, 2017 · $24k · revenue -19%
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
Kansas City Pet Project

Leading the way in creating a compassionate, safe community for pets and people through progressive lifesaving programs and services, community resources, and educational opportunities.

Animals
2
Kitty City Kansas Rescue Incorporated

Find homes for homeless cats through adoptions

Animals
3
Spca of Pittsylvania County Inc

The spca of pittsylvania county is committed to rescuing adoptable animals from impoundment and euthanasia, so they can be placed in proper homes. this is acheived primarily through vetting, fostering, and placing the animals in their…

Animals
4
Humane Society of Jefferson County Inc

The mission of the humane society of jefferson county is to improve the lives of animals in need through compassionate care, adoption, advocacy and education while also inspiring humane communities that foster kindness and respect for all.

Animals
5
Kitties & Kanines Shelter

Our mission is to provide non-lethal solutions to the homeless, abandoned, and feral animal population of fort smith, arkansas. we will do this through re-unifying animals with their owners, adopting animals to new families, or…

Animals
6
Animal Rescue Foundation Inc

Animal rescue foundation inc (arf) rescues homeless dogs and cats in the tulsa area and helps them find loving homes. we do this by rescuing homelss animals out of area shelters, accepting owner surrendered pets, placing them in foster…

Animals
7
Tulsa Spca

The Tulsa SPCA's mission is to improve the lives of dogs and cats, and their human companions.

Animals
8
Partners for Animal Welfare Society

Animal shelter for the protection and care of abused and neglected animals.

Animals
9
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Our mission is to engage with the community to encourage responsible pet care, assist with spay/neuter program to prevent overpopulation, reunite lost animals with their owners, and provide humane care while seeking forever homes for…

—
10
Humane Animal Rescue

We strive to provide all aspects of care to abandoned, neglected, and injured animals; reunite lost pets with their caregivers or seek new families for them; educate the community on humane care and interactions with all animals with the…

Animals
11
Save a Dog Inc

To help adoptive dogs find a permanent home.

Animals
12
Stray Paws Rescue

Our organization believes it is our moral responsibility to protect and improve the lives of rescued animals and place them in loving permanent homes in st. louis metro.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Safehouse Crisis Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Guardians of the Children. 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

15 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. 15 of the 49 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF BAXTER SPRINGS - ANIMAL SHE: $150,000 · OtherCITY OF BAXTER SPRINGS - ANIMAL SHEPITTSBURG STATE UNIVERSITY: $150,000 · OtherPITTSBURG STATE UNIVERSITYMT CARMEL FOUNDATION: $68,500 · OtherMT CARMEL FOUNDATIONBAXTER SPRINGS USD 508: $59,000 · OtherBAXTER SPRINGS USD 508CITY OF PITTSBURG: $50,000 · OtherCITY OF PITTSBURGCITY OF BAXTER SPRINGS - DOG PARK: $40,421 · OtherCITY OF BAXTER SPRINGS - DOG PARKFRANKIES FRIENDS CHARITABLE PET: $34,500 · OtherUMASS-AMHERST-THOMAS FOUNDATION: $30,000 · Other+29 more: $163,473 · Other+29 moreSEK HUMANE SOCIETY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY KANSAS: $148,555 · AnimalsSEK HUMANE SOCIETY O…FRANKIE'S FRIENDS INC: $23,866 · AnimalsFRANKIE'S FRIENDS IN…PROUD ANIMAL LOVERS SHELTER INC: $11,299 · AnimalsPROUD ANIMAL LOVERS …+3 more: $10,500 · Animals+3 morePOINT FORWARD INC: $106,500 · Community ImprovementPOINT FORWA…+1 more: $1,000 · Community ImprovementPITTSBURG STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · EducationAT THE TABLE INC: $10,000 · Food & NutritionCOLONIAL FOX THEATRE FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Arts & CultureGUARDIANS OF THE CHILDREN: $6,000 · Youth Development
Other$745,894Animals$194,220Community Improvement$107,500Education$20,000Food & Nutrition$10,000Arts & Culture$10,000Youth Development$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSEK HUMANE SOCIETY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY KANSAS: $148,555 over 8y, 20% of budgetPOINT FORWARD INC: $106,500 over 3y, 6.3% of budgetFRANKIE'S FRIENDS INC: $23,866 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetPITTSBURG STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPROUD ANIMAL LOVERS SHELTER INC: $11,299 over 3y, 4.6% of budgetAT THE TABLE INC: $10,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetCOLONIAL FOX THEATRE FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetGUARDIANS OF THE CHILDREN: $6,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetJoplin Humane Society Inc: $5,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $4,600 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSAFEHOUSE CRISIS CENTER INC: $2,955 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSECOND CHANCE ANIMAL SANCTUARY INC: $2,500 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS KANSAS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetANGELS AMONG US INC: $1,000 over 1y, 1.8% 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 SEK HUMANE SOCIETY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY KANSAS ↗
  • Who funds POINT FORWARD INC ↗
  • Who funds FRANKIE'S FRIENDS INC ↗
  • Who funds PITTSBURG STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds PROUD ANIMAL LOVERS SHELTER INC ↗
  • Who funds AT THE TABLE INC ↗
  • Who funds COLONIAL FOX THEATRE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds GUARDIANS OF THE CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds Joplin Humane Society Inc ↗
  • Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SAFEHOUSE CRISIS CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds SECOND CHANCE ANIMAL SANCTUARY INC ↗
  • Who funds THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗

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 of Southeast KansasKS24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Southeast Kansas · Coleman Family Foundation Inc · Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · Miller Family Foundation Inc · Commerce Bancshares Foundation · Edward Jones Foundation · Network for Good · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Ronald O Thomas Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ronald O Thomas Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s 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 · 0–5%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Ronald O Thomas Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Ronald O Thomas 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 49 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 Ronald O Thomas’ filings →

    More from the funding graph