· Private foundation
Margaret M Walker Charitable Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What it funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.
Where the money goes
Grants by size, and the largest recipients.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $240k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BUHL PARK CORPORATION | $80,000 |
| THE BUHL CLUB | $80,000 |
| LINDENPOINTE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION | $80,000 |
| PENN NORTHWEST DEVELOPMENT CORP | $10,000 |
| RANDOM ACTS OF ARTISTS INC | $7,500 |
Does the money reach high-need areas?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
How this is measured
How this is measured
Who it funds again
Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.
Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +128% since the first grant, against +122% for those funded once.
7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
How this is measured
Backed again, and grew
- BPBUHL PARK CORPORATION7× · 2017–2025 · $552k · revenue +128%
- LDLINDENPOINTE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION7× · 2017–2025 · $547k · revenue +140% · 39% of their budget
- BCBUHL COMMUNITY RECREATION CENTER7× · 2017–2025 · $532k · revenue +71%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $5k
- SRSHENANGO RIVER WATCHERS INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $4k · revenue +122%
- CFCOMMUNITY FOOD WAREHOUSEone grant, 2017 · $2k
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.
6 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. 6 of the 13 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.
Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee
Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing
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.
Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Western Pennsylvania and Eastern Ohio · Buhl Regional Health Foundation · Amazonsmile Foundation
How this is measured
How much its grantees rely on government
Each dot is one organization Margaret M Walker Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Margaret M Walker Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.
How this is measured
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Margaret M Walker Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Margaret M Walker Charitable Foundation 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.
Play a game based on Margaret M Walker’s filings →