Skip to content

· Private foundation

James and Ethel Walker Charitable Trust

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$19k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Food & Nutrition$30kScience & Tech$30kEducation$15kCivil Rights$11kInternational$5kHealth$4kArts & Culture$1kRecreation & Sports$500
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$209k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WBUR$5,000
BOSTON AREA GLEANERS$2,000
FOOD FOR FREE$2,000
NEWTON FOOD PANTRY$2,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
WORLD KITCHEN CENTRAL$2,000
MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION$2,000
LEXFARM$2,000
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 (FY23–23, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL: $5k → 14%COMMUNITY SERVINGS: $1k → 16%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.
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.

71%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$68k · 7 repeat orgs$28k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +77% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
11

Total granted

$68k
$26k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+77%
+13%

Still filing today

57%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’22’23’24
Food & NutritionHuman ServicesInternationalArts & CultureRecreation & SportsCivil RightsOther
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

  • TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2022–2024 · $15k · revenue +12%
  • NF
    NEWTON FOOD PANTRY INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $12k · revenue +90%
  • BOSTON AREA GLEANERS INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $4k · revenue +77%

Funded once

  • RF
    REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALLgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue +53%
  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +13%
  • N
    NARAL
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
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
Greater Boston Food Bank Inc

Our costs consist of acquiring, sorting and distributing food to 617 member agencies, transportation and logistics, and community outreach to 69 direct distribution sites such as gbfb mobile markets, and federal distributions for low…

—
2
The Federation of Massachusetts Farmers and Gardeners Markets Inc

Mass farmers markets partners wtih farmers, consumers, and communities to improve the health of individuals, strenghten community vitality, and enhance local farm viability through farmers markets.

Food & Nutrition
3
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
4
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
5
Spoonfuls

Spoonfuls is an organization that facilitates the recovery and distribution of healthy, perishable food that would otherwise be discarded. spoonfuls works efficiently to deliver this food directly to the community organizations and…

Food & Nutrition
6
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

—
7
Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation Inc

Massachusetts taxpayers foundation provides public & private sector decision makers with accurate, timely, unbiased research & constructive solutions that drive public policy in order to strengthen the state's finances & position the…

Public Benefit
8
Free Press

Free press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. we believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse…

Arts & Culture
9
International Food Information Council

To effectively communicate science based information on food safety, nutrition, and health for the public good.

Arts & Culture
10
Food Link Inc

Food link is working to create a more equitable food system throughout greater boston by rescuing and distributing high-quality, customized food to under-resourced communities and by advocating for systems change.

Food & Nutrition
11
Partners in Food Solutions

Improve the food value chain in developing countries by mobilizing corporate volunteers to share knowledge and expertise with small and growing food processors.

International
12
The Boston Foundation for Sight Inc

Our mission is to improve quality of life by transforming the understanding, treatment, and care of the ocular surface.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Boston Area Gleaners Inc; the most unlike its peers is Wgbh Educational Foundation. 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

12 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. 12 of the 19 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
10/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $15,000 · OtherTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITYLEXFARM: $12,000 · OtherLEXFARMIndividual grant recipient: $12,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientWORLD KITCHEN CENTRAL: $9,000 · OtherWORLD KITCHEN CENTRALNARAL: $5,000 · OtherNARALAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTY UNION: $2,000 · Other+4 more: $4,000 · Other+4 moreNEWTON FOOD PANTRY INC: $12,000 · Food & NutritionNEWTON FOOD PANTRY INCBOSTON AREA GLEANERS INC: $4,000 · Food & NutritionBOSTON AREA GLEANERS IN…FOOD FOR FREE COMMITTEE INC: $4,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD FOR FREE COMMITTEE…REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL: $5,000 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY SERVINGS INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $5,000 · InternationalAMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE: $2,000 · Civil RightsTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $2,000 · HealthSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $2,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$59,000Food & Nutrition$20,000Human Services$6,000International$5,000Civil Rights$2,000Health$2,000Crime & Legal$2,000

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 budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNEWTON FOOD PANTRY INC: $12,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOSTON AREA GLEANERS INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD FOR FREE COMMITTEE INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWGBH Educational Foundation: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY SERVINGS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF FORT WILLIAMS PARK: $500 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.

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.

American Online Giving Foundation IncDE8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 James and Ethel Walker Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from James and Ethel Walker Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Boston Area Gleaners Inc: 20% of income from government
  • Trustees of Boston University: 12% of income from government
  • Community Servings Inc: 12% of income from government
  • Food for Free Committee Inc: 3% of income from government
  • Wgbh Educational Foundation: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
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 James and Ethel Walker Charitable Trust?

Find your warmest path to James and Ethel Walker Charitable Trust 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 19 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on James and Ethel Walker’s filings →

More from the funding graph