Skip to content
Susan Flint Seay Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Susan Flint Seay Charitable Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$15k
Granted FY2023
9
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0190% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2023.

Animals$32kHealth$8kCrime & Legal$5kHuman Services$3kReligion$1kOther$0
02FY2023 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$4,000
OKLAHOMA ALLIANCE FOR ANIMALS$3,500
DVIS$1,500
T-TOWN TNR$1,000
PAUSE4PAWS$1,000
SAPULPA FURRY FRIENDS$1,000
LEGACY OF HOPE DOG RESCUE$1,000
HELPLESS HOUNDS DOG RESCUE$1,000
PUPPY HAVEN RESCUE INC$1,000
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 (FY21–23, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, 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%DVIS: $2k → 15%DVIS: $2k → 15%DVIS: $2k → 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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$49k · 10 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2023, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
7

Total granted

$49k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
+66%

Still filing today

80%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23
AnimalsHuman ServicesHealthEducationPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • OKLAHOMA ALLIANCE FOR ANIMALS INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $9k · revenue +19%
  • PAUSE4PAWS INC
    4× · 2020–2023 · $6k · revenue +188%
  • HH
    HELPLESS HOUNDS DOG RESCUE
    4× · 2020–2023 · $5k · revenue +51%

Funded once

  • CC
    CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF OKLAHOMA CITY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue +66%
  • UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue 0%
  • R6
    ROUTE 66 PET RESCUE
    one grant, 2020 · $2k
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
Hope Fur Paws Rescue

To help injured, abandoned and unwanted animals. We provide food, vet care that includes heartworm prevention and spay or neuter services, shelter and anything else needed.

Animals
2
Safe Haven Inc
Animals
3
Pets Without Partners

Find homes for homeless/abandoned dogs. Provide full vet car and housing while awaiting adoption,

Animals
4
Paws Fur Hope

We rescue pets from neglect foster them and then adopt them to suitable families

Animals
5
Paws Animal Rescue Center

To help rescue unwanted pets

Animals
6
Purple Paws 2nd Chance Rescue
Animals
7
Muttsnstuff

Rescue animals

Animals
8
K911

To rescue abandoned and displaced cats and dogs, bring them back to health, provide all medical and prepare them for their new home

Animals
9
Shelters and Shelves Rescue Inc

foster based dog rescue working with shelters to save dogs

Animals
10
Home Fur Keeps

Home Fur Keeps is a non-profit animal rescue; however, due to financial difficulties operations have been paused.

—
11
Pug Rescue Owasso

Pug Rescue Owasso mission is to rescue abused, abandoned, homeless, unwanted , sick and injured pugs. we rehabilitate them medically and emotionally and place them into homes

Animals
12
St Clouds Rescue
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sapulpa Furry Friends Inc; the most unlike its peers is University of California San Francisco Foundation. 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

11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 17 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OKLAHOMA ALLIANCE FOR ANIMALS INC: $8,500 · AnimalsOKLAHOMA ALLIANCE FOR ANIMALS INCHELPLESS HOUNDS DOG RESCUE: $4,500 · AnimalsHELPLESS HOUNDS DOG RESCUESAPULPA FURRY FRIENDS INC: $4,500 · AnimalsSAPULPA FURRY FRIENDS INCLEGACY OF HOPE DOG RESCUE INC: $4,500 · AnimalsLEGACY OF HOPE DOG RESCUE INCPUPPY HAVEN RESCUE INC: $4,500 · AnimalsPUPPY HAVEN RESCUE INCT-TOWN TNR INC: $2,000 · AnimalsT-TOWN TNR INCIndividual grant recipient: $8,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF OKLAHOMA CITY INC: $2,000 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIO…Individual grant recipient: $2,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientROUTE 66 PET RESCUE: $1,500 · OtherROUTE 66 PET RESCUEANTHEM SERVICE DOGS INC: $1,500 · OtherANTHEM SERVICE DOGS INCTHE RIGHT PATH: $1,000 · OtherTHE RIGHT PATHASCENSION ST JOHN FOUNDATION: $1,000 · OtherASCENSION ST JOHN FOUNDATIONPAUSE4PAWS INC: $5,500 · HealthPAUSE4PAWS…DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INTERVENTION SERVICES: $4,500 · Human ServicesUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $2,000 · EducationSpikes K9 Fund: $500 · Public Safety & Disaster
Animals$28,500Other$17,000Health$5,500Human Services$4,500Education$2,000Public Safety & Disaster$500

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 budgetOKLAHOMA ALLIANCE FOR ANIMALS INC: $8,500 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetPAUSE4PAWS INC: $5,500 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetHELPLESS HOUNDS DOG RESCUE: $4,500 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetSAPULPA FURRY FRIENDS INC: $4,500 over 4y, 2.4% of budgetLEGACY OF HOPE DOG RESCUE INC: $4,500 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetPUPPY HAVEN RESCUE INC: $4,500 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetDOMESTIC VIOLENCE INTERVENTION SERVICES: $4,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF OKLAHOMA CITY INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetT-TOWN TNR INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSpikes K9 Fund: $500 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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.

The Hardesty Family F…The Anne and Henry Za…Tulsa Community Found…Paypal Charitable Giv…Verizon FoundationNetwork for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Hardesty Family Foundation IncOK13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Hardesty Family Foundation Inc · The Anne and Henry Zarrow Foundation · Tulsa Community Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Verizon Foundation · Network for Good · 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 Susan Flint Seay Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Susan Flint Seay Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 15%
  • Domestic Violence Intervention Services: 15% of income from government
  • Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
1report 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 17 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Susan Flint Seay’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