Skip to content
William T Oxenham Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

William T Oxenham Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$487k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$168k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$242kEducation$177kInternational$83kPublic Safety & Disaster$21kHuman Services$12kReligion$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $34k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $453k
$67,440
Median grant
4
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COLLEGE OF WILLIAM & MARY$168,413
AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE$150,000
Individual grant recipient$67,440
WORLD VISION$67,440
PANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK$33,720
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 (FY22–24, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%RIP MEDICAL DEBT: $3k → 13%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $4k → 14%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

WA
IL
NY
IA
CT
VA
KS
TN
DC
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.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$321k · 8 repeat orgs$215k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
4

Total granted

$321k
$13k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-13%
+39%

Still filing today

63%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 52% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $202k 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
HealthHuman ServicesEducationReligionPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $175k · revenue +77%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    3× · 2023–2025 · $75k
  • LUPUS RESEARCH ALLIANCE INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $31k · revenue -28%

Funded once

  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
    one grant, 2024 · $4k · revenue +3%
  • AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $4k · revenue -7%
  • MEDICAL DEBT RESOLUTION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue +46%
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
American Water Works Association

To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.

Public Benefit
2
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
3
American Academy of Neurology

The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.

Community Improvement
4
Waterorg

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

International
5
Air & Space Forces Association

The air & space forces association (afa) is a nonprofit, independent, professional military, and aerospace education association. the association's mission is to promote dominant u.s. air and space forces as the foundation of a strong…

Education
6
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
7
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
8
Alliance for Regenerative Medicine

The alliance for regenerative medicine (arm) is the preeminent global advocate for regenerative and advanced therapies. arm fosters research, development, investment and commercialization of transformational treatments and cures for…

Health
9
Gavi Alliance

To save lives and protect people's health by increasing equitable and sustainable use of vaccines.

International
10
American Political Science Association

The american political science association ("apsa") supports excellence in scholarship and teaching and informed discourse about politics, policy, and civic participation. the association promotes a lively, diverse community of scholars,…

Social Science
11
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
12
Arthritis Foundation Inc

The arthritis foundation is boldly pursuing a cure for america's #1 cause of disability, while championing the fight against arthritis with life-changing resources, science, advocacy, and community connections.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wounded Warrior Project Inc; the most unlike its peers is African American Teaching Fellows of Charlottesville-Albemarle 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

11 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. 11 of the 15 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
6/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COLLEGE OF WILLIAM & MARY: $168,413 · OtherCOLLEGE OF WILLIAM & MARYIndividual grant recipient: $74,563 · OtherIndividual grant recipientAMERICAN RED CROSSKY RELIEF: $12,076 · Other+1 more: $5,570 · OtherAMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION: $174,592 · HealthAMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTIONPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC: $33,720 · HealthPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INCLUPUS RESEARCH ALLIANCE INC: $30,539 · HealthLUPUS RESEARCH ALLIANCE INCWORLD VISION INC: $78,971 · InternationalWORLD VISION IN…AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $3,585 · InternationalWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $8,947 · Human ServicesAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $3,585 · Human ServicesMEDICAL DEBT RESOLUTION INC: $2,952 · Human ServicesAFRICAN AMERICAN TEACHING FELLOWS OF CHARLOTTESVILLE-ALBEMARLE INC: $8,570 · EducationAWANA CLUBS INTERNATIONAL AND AFFILIATES: $5,938 · ReligionGARY SINISE FOUNDATION: $2,952 · Philanthropy
Other$260,622Health$238,851International$82,556Human Services$15,484Education$8,570Religion$5,938Philanthropy$2,952

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 budgetAMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION: $174,592 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetWORLD VISION INC: $78,971 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC: $33,720 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLUPUS RESEARCH ALLIANCE INC: $30,539 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $8,947 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAFRICAN AMERICAN TEACHING FELLOWS OF CHARLOTTESVILLE-ALBEMARLE INC: $8,570 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetAWANA CLUBS INTERNATIONAL AND AFFILIATES: $5,938 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $3,585 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $3,585 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDICAL DEBT RESOLUTION INC: $2,952 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGARY SINISE FOUNDATION: $2,952 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization William T Oxenham Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from William T Oxenham Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Americares Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get 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 · 0–15%
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 15 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 William T Oxenham’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