evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Tulsa Remote — Remote-Worker Relocation Programme

United States of America · Tulsa · See the United States of America profile

Evidence: Quasi-experimental Top 65% 62/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Philanthropy-funded $10,000 relocation grant lures remote workers to Tulsa, Oklahoma; independent studies found a 2021 cohort generated $62M in new local income and 592 jobs, a $13.77 return per dollar invested, with growth continuing through 2023.

62 US$ million
New local labor income generated (2021 cohort) (2021)
592 jobs
New jobs supported (2021 cohort) (2021)
13.77 US$ new local earnings per US$1 spent
Return on relocation grant spending (2021)
26.5 US$ thousand
Annual real-income advantage for members (2018-2021)
54 %
Members expecting to stay five or more years (2018-2021)
181,000 US$
Cumulative new labor income per member present in Tulsa (2023)
4.4 US$ million
Added county tax revenue (2023)
6.8 US$ million
Added state tax revenue (2023)
1,600+ members
Members relocated (as of September 2022)
Tulsa Remote — Remote-Worker Relocation Programme

Details

Maturity
Scaling
Promoter
George Kaiser Family Foundation (Tulsa Remote LLC)
Period
2018–present
Keywords
remote work, talent attraction, philanthropy-funded relocation, economic development

Context

Tulsa Remote is a philanthropy-funded relocation programme launched in November 2018 by the George Kaiser Family Foundation (GKFF), a large private foundation built on Tulsa oil wealth, and run day-to-day by the nonprofit Tulsa Remote LLC.

Objectives

To attract remote workers to Tulsa, Oklahoma via a $10,000 relocation grant, conditional on keeping a remote job and staying at least one year.

Activities

The programme grew from an initial pilot of a few hundred people to over 1,200 relocated members by November 2021 and 1,600+ by September 2022, drawn from more than 20,000 applications across its first two recruitment waves; roughly 95% of participants meet the one-year retention bar.

Results

Economic Innovation Group (EIG) found the cohort present at the start of 2021 generated an estimated $62 million in new local labor income and supported 592 new jobs, a return of $13.77 in new local earnings per dollar spent on relocation grants. A Brookings-published academic evaluation comparing 411 Tulsa Remote members against accepted-but-not-moved and rejected applicants (2018-2021) found members reported a $26.5k annual real-income advantage, with 54% expecting to stay five or more years. The programme's 2023 Economic Impact Report put cumulative new labor income at roughly $181,000 per member present in Tulsa, with $4.4 million and $6.8 million in added county and state tax revenue respectively, and 53% of that year's newcomers from historically underrepresented racial and ethnic groups.

Conclusions

Participants are a self-selected, highly credentialed group (median income ~$85,000; 88% hold a bachelor's degree or higher), so the model has not been shown to work for a broadly disadvantaged workforce, and the programme depends entirely on one foundation's continued willingness to fund $10,000 grants at scale. Less rigorously audited copycat schemes (e.g. in Northwest Arkansas and West Virginia) have since tested the model with more modest results.

Implementation

Indicative cost
High (€500k–€5M) — $10,000 per-participant relocation grant; with 1,600+ members relocated by September 2022, cumulative grant spending runs into the tens of millions of dollars, funded entirely by the George Kaiser Family Foundation endowment.
Time to results
Medium (1–3 years) — Launched November 2018; grant requires a minimum one-year residency; measurable economic-impact results have been reported for cohorts from 2021 through 2023.
Staffing & skills
George Kaiser Family Foundation (GKFF) as sole funder, Tulsa Remote LLC, a dedicated nonprofit, running day-to-day programme operations

Conditions for success

  • Large, patient philanthropic capital from a single well-endowed foundation
  • Rigorous applicant screening drawing on a large applicant pool (20,000+ applications)
  • One-year residency requirement tied to remote-job retention, with ~95% compliance
  • Independent third-party evaluation (EIG, Brookings) commissioned to validate impact claims

Common failure modes

  • Total dependence on one foundation's continued funding willingness; no diversified or public funding base
  • Participant pool is highly self-selected and credentialed, not representative of a broadly disadvantaged workforce
  • 'Expected to stay' figures are self-reported intentions rather than observed long-run retention
  • Less rigorously audited copycat programmes elsewhere (Northwest Arkansas, West Virginia) have produced more modest results

Where it fits

Governance type
philanthropy-funded nonprofit LLC
Scale
mid-size US city
Income level
high-income (US), funded by a private foundation endowment

Commonly funded by

Philanthropic / foundation funding

Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Where it's been adopted

Documented replications and adaptations of this practice elsewhere.

PlaceWhenAdopterOutcome
Northwest Arkansas, United States of America Copycat remote-worker relocation grant scheme; results reported as more modest and less rigorously audited than Tulsa Remote.
West Virginia, United States of America Copycat remote-worker relocation grant scheme; results reported as more modest and less rigorously audited than Tulsa Remote.

Similar practices you may find useful

★ 100

work2future

United States of America

work2future is Silicon Valley’s Workforce Investment Network. It is a part of the national workforce development system as authorized by …

★ 91

London Living Wage Policy

United Kingdom

The (true) Living Wage is an hourly rate of pay set independently and updated annually (not the UK government's National …