Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Goatcher Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$43k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$23k
Largest
01What it funds
0190% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Crime & Legal$110kHuman Services$73kEmployment$68kEducation$56kHousing & Shelter$24kArts & Culture$15kHealth$14kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $38k
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$772k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
METRO CHRISTIAN ACADEMY$23,000
A NEW LEAF$15,000
RESONANCE CENTER FOR WOMEN$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 (FY17–25, $127k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 98% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Hope Harbor: $3k → 10%NEIGHBORS ALONG THE LINE: $9k → 14%Neighbors Along the Line: $8k → 14%NEIGHBORS ALONG THE LINE: $8k → 14%Neighbors Along the Line: $8k → 14%Neighbors Along the Line: $5k → 14%DaySpring Villa Women and Childrens Shelter Inc: $8k → 15%Neighbors Along the Line: $5k → 14%DaySpring Villa Women and Childrens Shelter Inc: $6k → 15%Neighbors Along The Line: $4k → 14%DaySpring Villa Women and Childrens Shelter Inc: $5k → 15%DaySpring Villa Women and Childrens Shelter Inc: $5k → 15%Resonance Center for Women: $5k → 15%Resonance Center for Women: $5k → 15%Resonance Center for Women: $5k → 15%Resonance Center for Women: $5k → 15%RESONANCE CENTER FOR WOMEN: $5k → 15%RESONANCE CENTER FOR WOMEN: $5k → 15%Resonance Center for Women: $5k → 15%RESONANCE CENTER FOR WOMEN: $5k → 15%Modus: $1k → 15%The Arc of Oklahoma: $5k → 15%THE ARC OF OKLAHOMA: $4k → 15%Ability Resources: $5k → 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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$332k · 9 repeat orgs$58k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +136% since the first grant, against -21% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
6

Total granted

$332k
$35k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+136%
-21%

Still filing today

89%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 47% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $23k 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 ServicesEducationCrime & LegalCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • TD
    THE DEMAND PROJECT INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $70k · revenue +964%
  • A NEW LEAF INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $68k · revenue +136%
  • NEIGHBORS ALONG THE LINE
    7× · 2017–2024 · $45k · revenue +69%

Funded once

  • TS
    The Spring
    one grant, 2022 · $15k
  • P
    Pathway
    one grant, 2022 · $8k
  • ABILITY RESOURCES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +72%
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
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
2
Independent Opportunties Inc of Oklahoma

Provide the highest quality residential services to people with developmental disabilities. a major part of the mission is to provide opportunities to these individuals based upon their right to a normal daily routine. specifically, it is…

Unclassified
3
Residential Services Inc

Residential Services, Inc. provides living options and related supports to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities of all ages.

Health
4
Earc Inc

To provide a better quality of life and greater independence to adults with developmental disabilities.

Human Services
5
The Remnant House

The remnant house, located in lee county, mississippi provides men and women with a faith-based christian transitional living home and recovery program. our christ-centered one year transitional living recovery program allows an individual…

Health
6
The Arc of Spokane

We promote independence and choice and enhance the quality of life for people with developmental disabilities and their families.

—
7
Noahs House

The organization provides opportunities for growth, independence, and fulfillment for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities by offering a loving, nurturing, and affordable residential community, along with structured…

Housing & Shelter
8
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
9
Transitional Living Centers of Oklahoma Inc

Assist in preparing homeless and near homeless women in the skills to care for their children and enable them to move toward self-sufficiency.

Housing & Shelter
10
Opportunities Unlimited Inc

A nonprofit organized for the purpose of providing evaluation, training, employment, education, placement and support services to individuals with emotional, physical and developmental disabilities, including people with severe…

Employment
11
Family Hope House Inc

Family Hope House empowers families through therapy, education, and advocacy. As Oklahoma's sole adoption competent mental health agency, we support foster and adoptive children for lasting stability and success.

Health
12
Arc of the Ozarks

To be a leader in service delivery for persons with disabilities by providing an array of supports and services to integrate them into their communities and to enhance the quality of their lives.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Spring Shelter Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Demand Project 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 16 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NEIGHBORS ALONG THE LINE: $45,300 · Human ServicesNEIGHBORS ALONG THE LINEResonance Center for Women Inc: $40,000 · Human ServicesResonance Center for Women IncTHE SPRING SHELTER INC: $23,932 · Human ServicesTHE SPRING SHELTER INCThe Arc of Oklahoma Inc: $9,250 · Human ServicesThe Arc of Oklahoma IncABILITY RESOURCES INC: $5,000 · Human Services+2 more: $3,500 · Human ServicesA NEW LEAF INC: $67,500 · OtherA NEW LEAF INCTARC: $20,000 · OtherTARCThe Spring: $15,000 · OtherThe SpringPathway: $7,500 · OtherPathwayIndividual grant recipient: $3,847 · OtherTHE DEMAND PROJECT INC: $70,296 · Crime & LegalTHE DEMAND PROJECT I…OKLAHOMA BAPTIST UNIVERSITY: $32,500 · EducationOKLAHOMA BAPTIST…TULSA CHRISTIAN EDUCATION CORPORATION: $23,000 · EducationTULSA CHRISTIAN …LIGHTHOUSE OUTREACH CENTER OF BARTLESVILLE INC: $23,500 · Community Improvement
Human Services$126,982Other$113,847Crime & Legal$70,296Education$55,500Community Improvement$23,500

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 budgetTHE DEMAND PROJECT INC: $70,296 over 6y, 14% of budgetA NEW LEAF INC: $67,500 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetNEIGHBORS ALONG THE LINE: $45,300 over 7y, 2.5% of budgetResonance Center for Women Inc: $40,000 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetOKLAHOMA BAPTIST UNIVERSITY: $32,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SPRING SHELTER INC: $23,932 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetLIGHTHOUSE OUTREACH CENTER OF BARTLESVILLE INC: $23,500 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetTULSA CHRISTIAN EDUCATION CORPORATION: $23,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe Arc of Oklahoma Inc: $9,250 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetHOPE HARBOR INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetModus Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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 THE DEMAND PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds A NEW LEAF INC ↗
  • Who funds NEIGHBORS ALONG THE LINE ↗
  • Who funds Resonance Center for Women Inc ↗
  • Who funds OKLAHOMA BAPTIST UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds THE SPRING SHELTER INC ↗
  • Who funds LIGHTHOUSE OUTREACH CENTER OF BARTLESVILLE INC ↗
  • Who funds TULSA CHRISTIAN EDUCATION CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds The Arc of Oklahoma Inc ↗
  • Who funds ABILITY RESOURCES INC ↗
  • Who funds HOPE HARBOR INC ↗
  • Who funds Modus Inc ↗

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.

Tulsa Community FoundationOK20.4× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tulsa Community Foundation · Grace & Franklin Bernsen Foundation · The Anne and Henry Zarrow Foundation · Morningcrest Healthcare Foundation · Mervin Bovaird Foundation · Ralph and Frances McGill Foundation the Trust Company of Oklahoma · The Gelvin Foundation · The Hardesty Family Foundation Inc · Hille Family Charitable Foundation · Oneok Foundation Inc · Sarkeys Foundation · Paul L Sisk and Helen I Sisk Charitable Trust

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 The Goatcher Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Goatcher Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 70%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 15%
  • Ability Resources Inc: 15% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
7get 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 · 0–40%
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 The Goatcher Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Goatcher 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 16 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 Goatcher’s filings →

More from the funding graph