Skip to content
The Oak Foundation USA at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

The Oak Foundation USA

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$4.1M
Granted FY2022
18
Grants FY2022
12
States reached
$537k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

64% of The Oak Foundation USA’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Hawaii Community Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 6 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year The Oak Foundation USA named its own grantees at scale: 10 organizations, $4M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

22
’19
28
’20
11
’21
10
’22
11
’23
6
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Environment$22MPhilanthropy$12MHuman Services$9.7MEducation$7.7MInternational$5.6MCivil Rights$4.9MHealth$3.0MHousing & Shelter$3.0MOther$0
02FY2022 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • $50k–250k13 grants · $2.1M
  • $250k+5 grants · $2.0M
$212,430
Median grant
12
States reached
$17M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$537,157
SAFER FAMILIES CENTRE OF RESEARCH EXCELLENCE -UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE$414,415
PROJECT HOME$400,000
HEARTLAND ALLIANCE$400,000
CENTER FOR LEARNER EQUITY$291,830
DARKNESS TO LIGHT$228,560
INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION$214,120
DONORS CHOOSE$212,500
AS YOU SOW$212,430
AS YOU SOW$205,641
CENTER FOR DIGITAL DEMOCRACY$200,000
NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND$192,532
PRESIDENT & FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE$180,688
NATIONAL HOUSING INSTITUTE DBA SHELTERFORCE$100,002
MASSACHUSETTS BUDGET AND POLICY CENTER$100,000
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 (FY19–24, $4.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 88% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CAST INC M: $250k → 8%CAST INC: $500k → 10%PROJECT HOME: $400k → 22%CAST INC: $250k → 8%CAST INC: $500k → 10%PROJECT HOME: $400k → 22%PROJECT HOME: $400k → 22%WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION: $185k → 17%WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION M: $170k → 17%SAFE HORIZON: $500k → 17%SAFE HORIZON M: $500k → 17%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

AK
WA
IL
NY
MA
PA
NJ
CA
CO
VA
AR
NC
SC
DC
HI
TX
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 33% of The Oak Foundation USA’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 15% of the giving stays in NY; by stated purpose, 25%.

The Oak Foundation USAlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.3% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$54M · 39 repeat orgs$7.5M to everyone else

39 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2022, 27 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

39
24

Total granted

$54M
$7.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+20%

Still filing today

85%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalEducationHuman ServicesCivil RightsEnvironmentCrime & LegalOther
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

  • CF
    CLIMATEWORKS FOUNDATION
    2× · 2020–2021 · $15M · revenue +96%
  • FF
    FUND FOR GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $2.8M · revenue +2%
  • BOOK HARVEST
    3× · 2019–2024 · $1.6M · revenue +463%

Funded once

  • PF
    PHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS INC
    one grant, 2019 · $1.5M · revenue -60%
  • NORTH CAROLINA EARLY CHILDHOOD FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $625k · revenue +52% · 76% of their budget
  • OI
    OCEANA INC
    one grant, 2019 · $450k · revenue -10%
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
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
2
Climate Catalyst Inc

Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.

Environment
3
Environmental Law Alliance Worldwide

Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.

—
4
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
5
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
6
Waterorg

Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.

International
7
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.

Crime & Legal
8
Pact Inc

Pact is a nonprofit organization that builds evidence-based, data-driven, and community-led solutions for human development (continued in schedule o)

International
9
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
10
Center for International Environmental Law Inc

To investigate, research, write, publish, present conferences and teach with respect to global, regional, transboundary, and comparative environmental issues and to make the findings from such activities available to the general public; to…

International
11
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
12
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is As You Sow; the most unlike its peers is Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

51 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. 51 of the 74 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
50/51
Grantees still filing
33/51
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HARLEM CHILDREN'S ZONE: $9,000,000 · OtherHARLEM CHILDREN'S ZONETHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1,350,000 · OtherHEARTLAND ALLIANCE: $1,200,000 · OtherNATIONAL DOMESTIC WORKERS ALLIANCE (NDWA): $1,000,000 · OtherDURHAM CHILDREN'S INITIATIVE: $1,500,000 · OtherDURHAM CHILDREN'S INITIATIVE+43 more: $12,868,656 · Other+43 moreCLIMATEWORKS FOUNDATION: $15,333,334 · Science & TechCLIMATEWORKS FOUNDATIO…HAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $12,018,000 · PhilanthropyHAWAII COMMUNITY F…+3 more: $368,793 · PhilanthropyFUND FOR GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS INC: $2,759,000 · InternationalFUND FOR GLOBA…HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $2,666,666 · InternationalHUMAN RIGHTS W…WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $1,674,424 · InternationalWORLD RESOURCE…PHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS INC: $1,500,000 · InternationalPHYSICIANS FOR…INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION: $749,870 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL …+1 more: $202,692 · InternationalBOOK HARVEST: $1,600,000 · EducationBOOK HARV…The Center for Learner Equity: $1,275,725 · EducationThe Cente…NEW TEACHER CENTER: $749,051 · EducationNEW TEACH…NORTH CAROLINA EARLY CHILDHOOD FOUNDATION INC: $625,000 · EducationNORTH CAR…PROTEUS FUND INC: $600,000 · EducationPROTEUS F…President and Fellows of Harvard College: $503,000 · EducationPresident…DONORSCHOOSEORG: $500,000 · EducationDONORSCHO…+2 more: $250,000 · EducationCAST INC: $1,500,000 · Human ServicesPROJECT HOME: $1,200,000 · Human ServicesSAFE HORIZON INC: $1,000,000 · Human ServicesWOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION INC: $355,222 · Human ServicesUpstream USA Inc: $1,000,000 · HealthVOICES OF COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS & LEADERS (VOCAL-NY) INC: $800,000 · Health
Other$26,918,656Science & Tech$15,333,334Philanthropy$12,386,793International$9,552,652Education$6,102,776Human Services$4,055,222Health$1,800,000

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 budgetCLIMATEWORKS FOUNDATION: $15,333,334 over 2y, 8.4% of budgetHAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $12,018,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $2,666,666 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetWORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE: $1,674,424 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetBOOK HARVEST: $1,600,000 over 3y, 15% of budgetCAST INC: $1,500,000 over 4y, 3.5% of budgetPHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS INC: $1,500,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetDURHAM CHILDREN'S INITIATIVE: $1,500,000 over 3y, 28% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1,350,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetThe Center for Learner Equity: $1,275,725 over 5y, 42% of budgetPROJECT HOME: $1,200,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetSAFE HORIZON INC: $1,000,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetUpstream USA Inc: $1,000,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetVOICES OF COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS & LEADERS (VOCAL-NY) INC: $800,000 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION: $749,870 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetNEW TEACHER CENTER: $749,051 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetCITY YEAR INC: $725,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA EARLY CHILDHOOD FOUNDATION INC: $625,000 over 1y, 76% of budgetAS YOU SOW: $600,002 over 2y, 4.9% of budgetPROTEUS FUND INC: $600,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetCENTER FOR DIGITAL DEMOCRACY: $600,000 over 3y, 20% of budgetNATIONAL LOW INCOME HOUSING COALITION: $600,000 over 2y, 6.0% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $503,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDONORSCHOOSEORG: $500,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetDARKNESS TO LIGHT INC: $460,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetOCEANA INC: $450,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS ADVOCATES FOR CHILDREN INC: $435,000 over 2y, 19% of budgetGlobal Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives: $400,000 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetOPERATION HOMEFRONT INC: $400,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetGLOBAL FISHING WATCH INC: $391,136 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetWOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION INC: $355,222 over 2y, 4.0% of budgetPEOPLE'S ACTION INSTITUTE: $330,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $313,746 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetMassachusetts Budget and Policy Center Inc: $300,025 over 3y, 5.9% of budgetNATIONAL ALLIANCE TO END HOMELESSNESS: $300,000 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetKAWERAK INC: $299,364 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetCOMPASS WORKING CAPITAL INC: $276,899 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetWomen's Link Worldwide: $260,000 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetTHE PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER: $240,287 over 2y, 6.4% of budgetCARNEGIE COUNCIL FOR ETHICS IN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS INC: $202,692 over 1y, 8.5% of budgetARC4JUSTICE INC: $196,993 over 2y, 22% of budgetNATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC: $192,532 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetPACIFIC ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCES CENTER: $166,937 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $150,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCHATHAM EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $135,460 over 2y, 66% of budgetOUR MILITARY KIDS INC: $133,333 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetNEW SCHOOLS FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $100,000 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.

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 David and Lucile …Gs Donor Advised Phil…Silicon Valley Commun…New Venture FundThe William & Flora H…The Ford FoundationRockefeller Philanthr…The Robert Wood Johns…Gates FoundationImpactassetsincAmalgamated Charitabl…WK Kellogg Foundation
The David and Lucile Packard FoundationCA18.5× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · New Venture Fund · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · The Ford Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Gates Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · WK Kellogg 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 The Oak Foundation USA funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Oak Foundation USA. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Cast Inc: 15% of income from government
  • City Year Inc: 11% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • Upstream Usa Inc: 4% of income from government
  • Compass Working Capital Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
12report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 Oak Foundation USA?

Find your warmest path to The Oak Foundation USA 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 74 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Oak Foundation USA’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