Skip to content
Alex C Walker Educational & Charitable at a glance

· Private foundation

Alex C Walker Educational & Charitable

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$501k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$96k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$2.8MSocial Science$361kAnimals$320kPublic Benefit$215kInternational$141kCrime & Legal$110kArts & Culture$91kScience & Tech$41kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $125k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $376k
$50,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$9.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMIGOS OF COSTA RICA INC$96,000
CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY$80,000
BROOKINGS INSTITUTION$80,000
NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION$70,000
OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST$50,000
NUCLEAR NEW YORK INC$45,000
PRICING CARBON INITIATIVE INC$40,000
THE BREAKTHROUGH INSTITUTE$20,000
INSIDE CLIMATE NEWS$20,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 69% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%KARUNA CENTER FOR PEACE BUILDING: $31k → 12%PRICING CARBON INITIATIVE INC: $40k → 12%NUCLEAR NEW YORK INC: $45k → 13%OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC: $35k → 17%THE NISKANEN CENTER INC: $80k → 14%CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $80k → 8%OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $100k → 15%COOK INLET KEEPER: $30k → 11%NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $80k → 6%INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE: $30k → 7%KARUNA CENTER FOR PEACE BUILDING: $30k → 12%PRICING CARBON INITIATIVE INC: $40k → 12%GOOD ENERGY COLLECTIVE INC: $60k → 12%NUCLEAR NEW YORK INC: $35k → 13%CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $80k → 8%OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $100k → 15%NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $70k → 6%PRICING CARBON INITIATIVE INC: $40k → 12%ENVIROMENTAL PROGRESS: $40k → 10%CLIMATE SCIENCE AWARENESS AND: $75k → 17%CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $80k → 8%OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $100k → 15%NUCLEAR INNOVATION ALLIANCE: $50k → 6%CLIMATE SCIENCE AWARENESS AND: $50k → 17%CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $80k → 8%OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $100k → 15%NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $40k → 6%CLIMATE SCIENCE AWARENESS AND: $50k → 17%CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $80k → 8%OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $100k → 15%NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $40k → 6%CLIMATE SCIENCE AWARENESS AND: $50k → 17%OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $100k → 15%CLIMATE SCIENCE AWARENESS AND: $50k → 17%BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: $80k → 14%OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $100k → 15%CARBON TAX CENTER: $45k → 17%BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: $80k → 14%OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $100k → 15%RESOURCES FOR THE FUTURE: $56k → 14%CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE: $80k → 8%OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $50k → 15%BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: $50k → 14%CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE: $58k → 8%BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: $50k → 14%CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE: $50k → 8%BROOKINGS INSTITUTE: $50k → 14%CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $50k → 8%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

ME
NY
MA
OR
PA
CA
CO
VA
AR
DC
GA
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 13% of Alex C Walker Educational & Charitable’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Alex C Walker Educational & Charitablelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 13% 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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.8M · 18 repeat orgs$298k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +57% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
8

Total granted

$3.8M
$278k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%
+13%

Still filing today

78%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
EnvironmentEducationSocial ScienceAnimalsPublic BenefitArts & CultureOther
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

  • TB
    THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION
    7× · 2017–2025 · $361k · revenue +2%
  • NW
    NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION
    7× · 2019–2025 · $320k · revenue +66%
  • TN
    THE NISKANEN CENTER INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $215k · revenue +182%

Funded once

  • GE
    GOOD ENERGY COLLECTIVE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $60k · revenue -22%
  • Resources for the Future Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $56k · revenue +13%
  • NI
    NUCLEAR INNOVATION ALLIANCEgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +175%
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
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
2
Climate Parliament Inc

Researching policy ideas on climate and clean energy in India, engaging legislators and business leaders to discuss those ideas.

International
3
Climate Institute

The climate institute is organized for the purpose of educating the general public and policy makers as to the gravity of potential climate change, exploring the policy implications of the latest scientific findings on climate modelling…

Environment
4
Third Way

To research and develop centrist policy ideas.

Civil Rights
5
Rocky Mountain Institute

Transform the global energy system to secure a clean, prosperous, zero-carbon future for all.

—
6
Environment Now
—
7
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
8
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
9
Climate Change Truth research

Present Netzeroco2 manuscript at climate change conferences and lead a 35 PhD team to debunk climate change garbage of the iPCC

Science & Tech
10
Fresh Energy

Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.

Environment
11
The Climate Group Inc

Climate group advances climate action by mobilizing business and government leadership to drive systemic decarbonization across energy, transport, and industry, while engaging the public through large-scale convenings and global platforms.…

Environment
12
Center for Climate and Energy Solutions Inc

The nonpartisan center for climate and energy solutions works to secure a safe and stable climate by accelerating the global transition to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and a thriving, just, and resilient economy. for over 25 years,…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Open Space Institute Inc; the most unlike its peers is National Wildlife Federation. 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

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 27 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)
11
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

OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $850,000 · EnvironmentOUR CHILDREN'S TRUSTCENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $725,000 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMYPRICING CARBON INITIATIVE INC: $210,000 · EnvironmentPRICING CARBON INITIATIVE INC+5 more: $158,000 · Environment+5 moreCLIMATE SCIENCE AWARENESS AND: $275,000 · OtherCLIMATE SCIENCE AWAREN…COOK INLET KEEPER: $103,700 · OtherCOOK INLET KEEPERIndividual grant recipient: $80,000 · OtherIndividual grant recip…MOUNT DESERT ISLAND BIOLOGICAL LAB: $70,500 · OtherMOUNT DESERT ISLAND BI…KARUNA CENTER FOR PEACEBUILDING INC: $91,000 · OtherKARUNA CENTER FOR PEAC…INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE: $90,000 · OtherINSTITUTE FOR JUSTICENUCLEAR NEW YORK INC: $80,000 · OtherNUCLEAR NEW YORK INC+1 more: $20,000 · OtherTHE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: $361,000 · Social ScienceTHE BROOKING…GOOD ENERGY COLLECTIVE INC: $60,000 · Social ScienceGOOD ENERGY …INSIDE CLIMATE NEWS INC: $20,000 · Social ScienceNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $320,000 · AnimalsNATIONAL W…OneReef Worldwide Stewardship: $60,000 · AnimalsOneReef Wo…THE NISKANEN CENTER INC: $215,000 · Public BenefitAMIGOS OF COSTA RICA INC: $141,000 · InternationalNUCLEAR INNOVATION ALLIANCE: $50,000 · EducationCARBON TAX CENTER: $45,000 · EducationPartnership for Responsible Growth Inc: $25,000 · EducationCONTINA IMPACT: $20,000 · Education
Environment$1,943,000Other$810,200Social Science$441,000Animals$380,000Public Benefit$215,000International$141,000Education$140,000

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 budgetOUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $850,000 over 9y, 6.3% of budgetCENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $725,000 over 9y, 43% of budgetTHE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: $361,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $320,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTHE NISKANEN CENTER INC: $215,000 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetPRICING CARBON INITIATIVE INC: $210,000 over 6y, 33% of budgetAMIGOS OF COSTA RICA INC: $141,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetKARUNA CENTER FOR PEACEBUILDING INC: $91,000 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE: $90,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNUCLEAR NEW YORK INC: $80,000 over 2y, 26% of budgetOneReef Worldwide Stewardship: $60,000 over 3y, 5.3% of budgetGOOD ENERGY COLLECTIVE INC: $60,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetResources for the Future Inc: $56,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNUCLEAR INNOVATION ALLIANCE: $50,000 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetOPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC: $45,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetCARBON TAX CENTER: $45,000 over 1y, 83% of budgetThe Breakthrough Institute: $30,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetHOWELL CONSERVATION FUND INC: $25,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetPartnership for Responsible Growth Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetCONTINA IMPACT: $20,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetECOFLIGHT: $2,000 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 OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY ↗
  • Who funds THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗
  • Who funds THE NISKANEN CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds PRICING CARBON INITIATIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds AMIGOS OF COSTA RICA INC ↗
  • Who funds KARUNA CENTER FOR PEACEBUILDING INC ↗
  • Who funds INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds NUCLEAR NEW YORK INC ↗
  • Who funds OneReef Worldwide Stewardship ↗
  • Who funds GOOD ENERGY COLLECTIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds Resources for the Future Inc ↗
  • Who funds NUCLEAR INNOVATION ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds CARBON TAX CENTER ↗
  • Who funds The Breakthrough Institute ↗
  • Who funds HOWELL CONSERVATION FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds Partnership for Responsible Growth Inc ↗
  • Who funds CONTINA IMPACT ↗
  • Who funds INSIDE CLIMATE NEWS INC ↗
  • Who funds ECOFLIGHT ↗

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 William & Flora H…Breakthrough Energy F…Bernard and Anne Spit…Jewish Communal FundThe Rodel FoundationJewish Community Fede…Rockefeller Philanthr…Silicon Valley Commun…Seattle FoundationVanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…Donor Advised Charita…
The William & Flora Hewlett FoundationCA16.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Breakthrough Energy Foundation · Bernard and Anne Spitzer Charitable Trust · Jewish Communal Fund · The Rodel Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Seattle Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Alex C Walker Educational & Charitable funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Alex C Walker Educational & Charitable. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Karuna Center for Peacebuilding Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 27 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 Alex C Walker Educational &’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