Skip to content

· Private foundation

James F & Gretchen Welsh Charitable Tru

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.

$50k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$23k
Largest
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$240kInternational$25kHealth$6kEnvironment$5kEducation$4kHuman Services$4kAnimals$2kPublic Benefit$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $40k
$4,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DIVINE LOVE WORLD CHARITY$23,000
VEDA GEETHA FOUNDATION$16,861
ALMA FUTURE FOUNDATION$4,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC$4,000
LAST CHANCE OF LIFE$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 (FY25–25, $23k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%DIVINE LOVE WORLD CHARITY: $23k → 17%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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$234k · 6 repeat orgs$56k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
6

Total granted

$234k
$6k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-4%
+139%

Still filing today

83%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’25
InternationalEducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureEnvironmentOther
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

  • IC
    INSPIRATION COMMUNITY
    6× · 2017–2022 · $223k · revenue -29% · 86% of their budget
  • AI
    AMMAN IMMAN WATER IS LIFE
    3× · 2017–2019 · $3k · revenue -76%
  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    2× · 2017–2019 · $2k · revenue +98%

Funded once

  • V
    VARIOUS
    one grant, 2017 · $2k
  • PT
    PATHWAYS TUTORING PROGRAM
    one grant, 2017 · $1k
  • ED
    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE
    one grant, 2017 · $1k
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
Eden Peopleplanet

To offer the dignity of fair employment to people living in impoverished communities, who become transformational agents of global forest restoration.

International
2
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
3
Women Donors Network

Women donors network advances a just, equitable, and sustainable world through the power of philanthropy, women's leadership, and collective and individual action.

Philanthropy
4
Waterorg

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

International
5
Water Foundation

The water foundation and our partners advance lasting solutions to secure safe water for people, restore and sustain freshwater ecosystems, and build climate resilience.

Environment
6
International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International
7
New York School of Interior Design

New york school of interior design provides the most innovative, immersive, and transformative interior design education in the world, demonstrating the impact of professionally designed interiors on the health, happiness, and well-being…

Education
8
Delterra Inc

Redesign human systems for the good of people and the planet by developing innovative, scalable solutions.

Environment
9
Devworks International

Devworks international is dedicated to a society where all people enjoy the freedom to pursue their own sustainable development. we contribute to this by strengthening the capacity of local organizations.

Human Services
10
Mighty Earth Inc

Mighty earth is a global advocacy organization working to defend nature, climate, and communities. our goal is to protect half of earth for nature and secure a stable climate that allows life to flourish.

Environment
11
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

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

International
12
Food & Water Watch

Food & water watch conducts extensive research and public education to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainably produced. so we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of…

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is Amman Imman Water Is Life. 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

8 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. 8 of the 17 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INSPIRATION COMMUNITY: $223,419 · OtherINSPIRATION COMMUNITYVEDA GEETHA FOUNDATION: $16,861 · OtherVEDA GEETHA FOUNDATION+8 more: $16,200 · Other+8 moreDIVINE LOVE WORLD CHARITY INC: $23,000 · Human ServicesAMMAN IMMAN WATER IS LIFE: $3,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $2,300 · InternationalTHE KEY SCHOOL INC: $2,000 · EducationAssociation for Waldorf Education in San Diego: $700 · EducationDEMOCRACY NOW PRODUCTIONS INC: $1,500 · Arts & CultureENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,000 · Environment
Other$256,480Human Services$23,000International$5,300Education$2,700Arts & Culture$1,500Environment$1,000

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 budgetINSPIRATION COMMUNITY: $223,419 over 6y, 86% of budgetAMMAN IMMAN WATER IS LIFE: $3,000 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $2,300 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE KEY SCHOOL INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDEMOCRACY NOW PRODUCTIONS INC: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAssociation for Waldorf Education in San Diego: $700 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.

  • Who funds INSPIRATION COMMUNITY ↗
  • Who funds DIVINE LOVE WORLD CHARITY INC ↗
  • Who funds AMMAN IMMAN WATER IS LIFE ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds THE KEY SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds DEMOCRACY NOW PRODUCTIONS INC ↗
  • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds Association for Waldorf Education in San Diego ↗

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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 James F & Gretchen Welsh Charitable Tru funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from James F & Gretchen Welsh Charitable Tru. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 17 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 James F & Gretchen Welsh Charitable Tru’s filings →

    More from the funding graph