Skip to content

· Private foundation

Rosebury Charitable Foundation

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.

$1.0M
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$800k
Largest
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$1.0MFood & Nutrition$278kHuman Services$234kHealth$188kRecreation & Sports$152kPublic Safety & Disaster$150kHousing & Shelter$115kYouth Development$78kOther$0
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k10 grants · $208k
  • $250k+1 grant · $800k
$20,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$6.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
John 316$800,000
Health Outreach Prevention Education H O P E$25,000
Meals on Wheels$25,000
Oklahoma Food Bank$25,000
Special Olympics Oklahoma$25,000
The Spring Shelter$20,000
Emerging Eagles$20,000
Tulsa Day Center for the Homeless$20,000
FCA$20,000
American Red Cross$15,000
Nevus Outreach$12,500
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 (FY17–24, $250k) 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%American Red Cross: $25k → 14%BROKEN ARROW NEIGHBORS: $10k → 15%American Red Cross: $25k → 14%American Red Cross: $20k → 14%American Red Cross: $15k → 14%American Red Cross: $15k → 14%American Red Cross: $10k → 14%The Spring Shelter: $25k → 15%The Spring Shelter: $25k → 15%The Spring Shelter: $20k → 15%Day Spring Villa: $20k → 15%The Spring Shelter: $20k → 15%Day Spring Villa: $5k → 15%Resonance Center for Women INC: $15k → 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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.2M · 20 repeat orgs$106k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +58% since the first grant, against +42% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
17

Total granted

$2.2M
$106k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
+42%

Still filing today

50%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHealthEducationArts & CultureFood & NutritionHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • Meals on Wheels of Norman Inc
    6× · 2017–2024 · $135k · revenue +46%
  • TS
    THE SPRING SHELTER INC
    6× · 2017–2024 · $115k · revenue +395%
  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
    6× · 2017–2024 · $110k · revenue +46%

Funded once

  • HP
    HANNA PUBLIC SCHOOLS ACT FUND
    one grant, 2022 · $28k
  • RC
    Resonance Center for Women Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue +22%
  • OR
    O R U GOLDEN EAGLE CLUB INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $12k · revenue +42%
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
Tulsa Area United Way

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

—
2
Goodwill Industries of Tulsa Inc

Goodwill empowers people to reach their full potential through work opportunities, training, and support services.

Employment
3
Lighthouse Behavioral Wellness Centers

Lighthouse Behavioral Wellness Centers, Inc. serves the community behavioral health needs of nine counties of Southern Oklahoma. Lighthouse offers integrated care through their outpatient and Health Home programs to adults and children.…

Health
4
Drug Recovery Inc

To provide a comprehensive continuum of behavioral health services, grounded in evidence, responsive to personal need, and empowering personal change for those who have been affected by substance use or co-occurring disorders.

Health
5
Life International

To partner with leaders globally to boldly proclaim the biblical truth of the father's heart for life, champion the gospel of jesus christ, and establish life-giving ministries.

Health
6
Narconon of Oklahoma Inc dba Narconon Arrowhead

Drug rehabilitation and services based on technology developed by l. ron hubbard.

—
7
Tulsa Spca

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

Animals
8
Norman Alcohol Information Center Inc

The Virtue Center is a place of help and hope for people facing addiction and mental health challenges.

Health
9
La Luz Organization Inc

La Luz Organization helps the underserved Latino population in Oklahoma with culturally and faith based trauma-informed services to victims of domestic violence,sexual assault and stalking.

Human Services
10
Child Abuse Network Inc dba Child Advocacy Network

In Tulsa County there are several agencies that address prevention and treatment of child abuse, but the Child Advocacy Network (CAN) is the ONLY nonprofit that provides intervention services for children and their nonoffending…

Crime & Legal
11
Hiv Resource Consortium Inc dba Tulsa Cares

Tulsa CARES is committed to delivering tailored and integrated programs and services that support clients in accessing medical care, achieving treatment adherence, experiencing improved health outcomes, and living an enhanced quality of…

Health
12
Palmer Continuum of Care Inc

To provide quality, compassionate treatment for substance abuse and addiction which promotes sustained recovery for adolescents, women and their families.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is 12 & 12 Inc; the most unlike its peers is O R U Golden Eagle Club 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

19 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. 19 of the 37 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
16/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

John 316: $913,000 · OtherJohn 316Oklahoma Food Bank: $110,000 · OtherOklahoma Food BankSALVATION ARMY: $103,750 · OtherSALVATION ARMYEMERGING EAGLES INC: $77,500 · OtherFCA: $70,000 · Other+20 more: $283,450 · Other+20 moreTHE SPRING SHELTER INC: $115,000 · Human ServicesTHE SPRING S…American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $110,000 · Human ServicesAmerican Nat…Resonance Center for Women Inc: $15,000 · Human ServicesResonance Ce…BROKEN ARROW NEIGHBORS INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesMeals on Wheels of Norman Inc: $135,000 · Food & NutritionNEVUS OUTREACH INC: $97,500 · HealthHOPE IS ALIVE MINISTRIES INC: $32,000 · Health+2 more: $3,500 · HealthTULSA DAY CENTER INC: $115,000 · Housing & ShelterFELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETES: $80,000 · Youth DevelopmentSpecial Olympics Oklahoma Inc: $50,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$1,557,700Human Services$250,000Food & Nutrition$135,000Health$133,000Housing & Shelter$115,000Youth Development$80,000Recreation & Sports$50,000

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 budgetMeals on Wheels of Norman Inc: $135,000 over 6y, 4.0% of budgetTHE SPRING SHELTER INC: $115,000 over 6y, 1.3% of budgetTULSA DAY CENTER INC: $115,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $110,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetNEVUS OUTREACH INC: $97,500 over 6y, 12% of budgetFELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETES: $80,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSpecial Olympics Oklahoma Inc: $50,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetHOPE IS ALIVE MINISTRIES INC: $32,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetThe University of Tulsa: $22,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetORAL ROBERTS UNIVERSITY: $22,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetResonance Center for Women Inc: $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetO R U GOLDEN EAGLE CLUB INC: $12,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetBROKEN ARROW NEIGHBORS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetA NEW LEAF INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget12 & 12 INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHealth Outreach Prevention Education Inc: $3,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNATUREWORKS INC: $2,500 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetPAUSE4PAWS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCENTER FOR ACTION AND CONTEMPLATION: $250 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Meals on Wheels of Norman Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE SPRING SHELTER INC ↗
  • Who funds TULSA DAY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
  • Who funds NEVUS OUTREACH INC ↗
  • Who funds FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETES ↗
  • Who funds Special Olympics Oklahoma Inc ↗
  • Who funds HOPE IS ALIVE MINISTRIES INC ↗
  • Who funds The University of Tulsa ↗
  • Who funds ORAL ROBERTS UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Resonance Center for Women Inc ↗
  • Who funds O R U GOLDEN EAGLE CLUB INC ↗
  • Who funds BROKEN ARROW NEIGHBORS INC ↗
  • Who funds A NEW LEAF INC ↗
  • Who funds 12 & 12 INC ↗
  • Who funds Health Outreach Prevention Education Inc ↗
  • Who funds NATUREWORKS INC ↗
  • Who funds PAUSE4PAWS INC ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR ACTION AND CONTEMPLATION ↗

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.

Ralph and Frances McGill Foundation the Trust Company of OklahomaOK24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ralph and Frances McGill Foundation the Trust Company of Oklahoma · Tulsa Community Foundation · The Anne and Henry Zarrow Foundation · Grace & Franklin Bernsen Foundation · The Hardesty Family Foundation Inc · Tulsa Fdn Gen Fd Xxxxx8000 · Morningcrest Healthcare Foundation · Mervin Bovaird Foundation · The Gelvin Foundation · Oneok Foundation Inc · Common Bond 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 Rosebury Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rosebury Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • Tulsa Day Center Inc: 9% of income from government
  • The University of Tulsa: 5% of income from government
  • Oral Roberts University: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
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 37 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Rosebury’s filings →

More from the funding graph