Skip to content
Aelk Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Aelk Foundation Inc

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.

$335k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$650kHuman Services$465kFood & Nutrition$243kEducation$145kPublic Benefit$105kYouth Development$100kArts & Culture$80kEmployment$55kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $60k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $275k
$60,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$5.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DAFGIVING360$150,000
TEXAS A&M FOUNDATION$65,000
SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL CENTRAL TEXAS$60,000
BORDER KINDNESS$30,000
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN$30,000
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 (FY17–24, $465k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%MULTICULTERAL REFUGEE COALITION: $110k → 10%MULTICULTERAL REFUGEE COALITION: $75k → 10%MULTICULTERAL REFUGEE COALITION: $70k → 10%MUTICULTERAL REFUGEE COALITION: $65k → 10%THE REGUFEE COLLECTIVE: $50k → 10%MUTICULTERAL REFUGEE COALITION: $35k → 10%MUTICULTERAL REFUGEE COALITION: $30k → 10%MUTICULTERAL REFUGEE COALITION: $30k → 10%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

NY
OR
CT
CA
MD
AZ
DC
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 11 repeat orgs$688k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +148% since the first grant, against +31% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
15

Total granted

$1.7M
$533k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+148%
+31%

Still filing today

73%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 16% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $155k 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
EducationEnvironmentHousing & ShelterInternationalYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesOther
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

  • TR
    THE REFUGEE COLLECTIVE
    8× · 2017–2024 · $465k · revenue +145%
  • ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED
    5× · 2017–2021 · $320k · revenue +202%
  • TI
    TreeFolks Inc
    3× · 2021–2023 · $220k · revenue +148%

Funded once

  • OY
    Out Youth Inc
    one grant, 2024 · $100k · revenue -39%
  • HB
    Houston Botanic Garden
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue -12%
  • LO
    LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS
    one grant, 2023 · $100k
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
Aclu Foundation of Texas Inc

The ACLU Foundation of Texas is the unyielding guardian and promoter of freedom, justice, equality and dignity of all people, particularly for those who are still fighting to secure the full exercise of their civil rights and liberties.…

Civil Rights
2
American Civil Liberties Union of Texas Inc

The ACLU of Texas works with communities, at the State Capitol, and in the courts to protect and advance civil rights and civil liberties for every Texan, no exceptions.

—
3
Farm and City

Farm&City is an independent 501c3 think & do tank dedicated to high quality urban & rural human habitat in Texas in perpetuity. We improve public policies to improve millions of Texans lives in ways that preserve and enhance Texas land,…

Education
4
Austin Habitat for Humanity Inc

Through faith in action, austin habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.

—
5
Trees for Houston

Plant, protect and promote trees all over the greater Houston area.

—
6
Leadership Austin

Leadership austin connects and develops leaders to courageously engage and transform our communities.

Youth Development
7
Center for Public Policy Priorities

At the Every Texan, we believe in a Texas that offers everyone the chance to compete and succeed in life. We envision a Texas where everyone is healthy, well educated, and financially secure. We want the best Texas, a proud state that sets…

Public Benefit
8
Keep Austin Fed

Reduce hunger and help the environment by connecting surplus food with our neighbors in need.

Food & Nutrition
9
Fruitful Commons

Every neighborhood has vibrant spaces that reconnect people to growing food, nature and each other.

Environment
10
The Global FoodBanking Network

To nourish the world's hungry through uniting and advancing food banks.

International
11
Center for Austin Independent Journalism

To equip Austinites to make informed decisions through independent, in-depth reporting, diverse opinions, and civil dialogue. A strong local press is essential for a healthy community and democracy. We work to make Austin a more empowered…

Arts & Culture
12
Texas 2036

Texas 2036 identifies and advances data-driven policies that will improve lives and expand opportunities for all Texans.

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Austin Community Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Smithsonian Institution. 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

22 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. 22 of the 31 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)
22/22
Grantees still filing
16/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $260,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTreeFolks Inc: $220,000 · OtherTreeFolks IncLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS: $100,000 · OtherLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERSFRESH CHEFS SOCIETY: $60,000 · OtherFRESH CHEFS SOCIETYSOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL CENTRAL TEXAS: $60,000 · OtherSOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL CENTRAL TEXASTHE LILITH FUND: $55,000 · OtherGood Work Austin: $55,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER TEXAS INC: $50,000 · OtherWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $40,000 · Other+11 more: $158,250 · Other+11 moreTHE REFUGEE COLLECTIVE: $465,000 · Human ServicesTHE REFUGEE COLLECTI…ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $320,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFE…Houston Botanic Garden: $100,000 · EnvironmentHouston Botanic Ga…AUSTIN YOUTH & COMMUNITY FARM INC DBA URBAN ROOTS: $115,000 · Youth DevelopmentAUSTIN YO…Out Youth Inc: $100,000 · Youth DevelopmentOut Youth…ROOM TO READ: $95,000 · EducationROOM TO R…Texas A&M Foundation: $65,000 · EducationTexas A&M…THE BREAKTHROUGH COLLABORATIVE: $50,000 · EducationTHE BREAK…DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $150,000 · PhilanthropyAUSTIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 · PhilanthropyMOBILE LOAVES & FISHES INC: $60,000 · Religion
Other$1,058,250Human Services$465,000Environment$420,000Youth Development$215,000Education$210,000Philanthropy$200,000Religion$60,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE REFUGEE COLLECTIVE: $465,000 over 8y, 15% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $320,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTreeFolks Inc: $220,000 over 3y, 7.1% of budgetDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $150,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAUSTIN YOUTH & COMMUNITY FARM INC DBA URBAN ROOTS: $115,000 over 3y, 4.9% of budgetOut Youth Inc: $100,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetHouston Botanic Garden: $100,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetROOM TO READ: $95,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTexas A&M Foundation: $65,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOBILE LOAVES & FISHES INC: $60,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetGood Work Austin: $55,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER TEXAS INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAUSTIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BREAKTHROUGH COLLABORATIVE: $50,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $40,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION COMMUNITIES INC: $12,750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSUSTAINABLE FOOD CENTER: $7,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE MIAAN GROUP INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAUSTIN PETS ALIVE INC: $3,000 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.

Austin Community Foun…Tingari FoundationShield-Ayres Foundati…St David's FoundationBetter Business BureauDonald D Hammill Foun…United Way for Greate…American Online Givin…National Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Austin Community Foundation IncTX19.4× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Austin Community Foundation Inc · Tingari Foundation · Shield-Ayres Foundation · St David's Foundation · Better Business Bureau · Donald D Hammill Foundation · United Way for Greater Austin · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Aelk Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Aelk Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
10report 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.

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 31 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 Aelk’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