Skip to content
The Shaw & Betty Walker Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Shaw & Betty Walker Foundation

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.

$1.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
52
Grants FY2025still arriving
9
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0191% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$1.2MHealth$832kEducation$790kRecreation & Sports$685kArts & Culture$483kHuman Services$243kCivil Rights$240kFood & Nutrition$178kOther$0
02FY2025 · 52 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k44 grants · $735k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $450k
$15,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$26M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY$150,000
MICHIGAN TECH UNIVERSITY$100,000
AMERICA FIRST LEGAL$100,000
NORTHWOODS MUSIC COLLABORATIVE$50,000
HOPE COLLEGE$50,000
GREAT LAKES OUTDOORS FOUNDATION$40,000
AGEWELL SVS MEALS ON WHEELS$30,000
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF EASTERN BIGHORNS$30,000
THE FOOD GROUP$30,000
SHERIDAN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION$30,000
SHERIDAN COMMUNITY LAND TRUST$30,000
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY$30,000
SHERIDAN AREA SEARCH AND RESCUE$30,000
PRESERVE HICKORY$25,000
THE HUB ON SMITH (FORMERLY SNR CTZN COUNCIL)$25,000
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 (FY21–25, $235k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 23% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Michigan American Legion Foundation: $15k → 16%Wings of Mercy: $25k → 8%Wings of Mercy: $25k → 8%AMERICAN RED CROSS OF WEST MICHIGAN: $10k → 11%Wings of Mercy: $25k → 8%Wings of Mercy: $15k → 8%WINGS OF MERCY: $10k → 8%EVERY WOMAN'S PLACE: $10k → 15%SHERIDAN FOSTER PARENT EXCHANGE: $20k → 10%Every Woman's Place: $10k → 15%ADVOCACY & RESOURCE CENTER: $20k → 10%Every Woman's Place: $10k → 15%Advocacy & Resource Center: $15k → 10%Advocacy & Resource Center: $15k → 10%Every Woman's Place: $5k → 15%Every Woman's Place: $5k → 15%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

MN
IL
MI
NY
WY
IN
MO
VA
DE
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.4M · 61 repeat orgs$488k to everyone else

61 repeat relationships: 43 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

61
22

Total granted

$5.4M
$338k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+22%

Still filing today

49%
41%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $150k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHealthHuman ServicesEnvironmentRecreation & SportsYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • GT
    GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $350k · revenue +139%
  • NM
    NORTHWOODS MUSIC COLLABORATIVE INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $240k · revenue +136% · 58% of their budget
  • SC
    SHERIDAN COMMUNITY LAND TRUST
    5× · 2021–2025 · $173k · revenue +61%

Funded once

  • MH
    MUNSON HEALTHCARE FOUNDATIONS
    one grant, 2021 · $75k · revenue +24%
  • MM
    Muskegon Museum of Art
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
  • DC
    DISCOVERY CENTER GREAT LAKESgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +978%
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
Legacy Land Conservancy

Safeguard southern michigan's land and water to support diverse, resilient, and thriving communities - forever

Environment
2
Life Choices of Central Michigan

Protecting life. sharing the truth. empowering people to make healthy life choices

—
3
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
4
Sheboygan County Food Bank Inc

Lead sheboygan county's efforts to increase the food security of its residents by distributing healthy emergency food and fostering innovative partnerships.

Food & Nutrition
5
Leelanau Conservancy

To conserve the land, water and scenic character of leelanau county, and to provide educational programs to develop an understanding and appreciation of leelanau county's natural heritage.

Environment
6
Michigan Legal Services

Provide free legal assistance to indigent and low income persons

Crime & Legal
7
Six Rivers Land Conservancy Fka Six Rivers Regional Land Conservancy

To conserve, sustain, and connect natural areas, land, and waters that make the places we live special

Environment
8
The Northern Michigan University Foundation

The nmu foundation will establish and foster relationships to generate resources that benefit the strategic goals of northern michigan university.

Education
9
Lake Superior Community Partnership Inc

To stimulate and sustain a vibrant regional economy by facilitating economic growth and prosperity.

—
10
Harbor Country Chamber of Commerce

To promote business and economic development for eight towns in southwest michigan.

—
11
Michigan Pharmacy Foundation

To advance pharmacy through education, practice innovation and research focused on patient care, for the improvement and promotion of public health and public education.

Philanthropy
12
Mymichigan Health Foundation

The corporation is organized and shall be operated exclusively for charitable, educational and scientific purposes by conducting or supporting activites exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alliance for the Great Lakes; the most unlike its peers is Sheridan Pilots Association Inc. 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

44 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 44 of the 92 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
43/44
Grantees still filing
20/44
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MICHIGAN TECH UNIVERSITY: $400,000 · OtherMICHIGAN TECH UNIVERSITYGrand Traverse Regional Land Cons: $395,000 · OtherGrand Traverse Regional Land ConsIndividual grant recipient: $225,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientNRA Foundation-Freedom Action Foundation: $220,000 · OtherNRA Foundation-Freedom Action FoundationGREAT LAKES OUTDOORS FOUNDATION: $203,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $193,000 · OtherAGEWELL SVS MEALS ON WHEELS: $135,000 · OtherThe Watershed Center Grand Traverse Bay: $130,000 · OtherPRESERVE HICKORY: $137,000 · Other+57 more: $1,854,000 · Other+57 moreGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $350,000 · EnvironmentGRAND TRAVE…SHERIDAN COMMUNITY LAND TRUST: $172,500 · EnvironmentSHERIDAN CO…KEWEENAW LAND TRUST INC: $65,000 · EnvironmentKEWEENAW LA…SHERIDAN COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $220,000 · HealthBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $85,000 · HealthAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $82,000 · HealthAUTISM SUPPORT OF WEST SHORE INC: $25,000 · HealthHOPE HOUSE FREE MEDICAL CLINIC: $15,000 · Health+1 more: $10,000 · HealthKALAMAZOO COLLEGE: $135,000 · EducationHOPE COLLEGE: $90,000 · EducationNORTH MUSKEGON BOOSTER CLUB INC: $30,000 · EducationOld Mission Peninsula Education Foundation: $25,000 · Education+3 more: $30,000 · EducationNORTHWOODS MUSIC COLLABORATIVE INC: $240,000 · Arts & CultureDISCOVERY CENTER GREAT LAKES: $25,000 · Arts & CultureWINGS OF MERCY INC: $100,000 · Human ServicesADVOCACY & RESOURCE CENTER: $50,000 · Human ServicesEVERY WOMAN'S PLACE INC: $40,000 · Human ServicesSHERIDAN FOSTER PARENT EXCHANGE: $20,000 · Human ServicesThe Michigan American Legion Foundation: $15,000 · Human ServicesAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $10,000 · Human ServicesAmerica First Legal Foundation: $150,000 · Crime & LegalCOMPASS CENTER FOR FAMILIES: $45,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$3,892,500Environment$587,500Health$437,000Education$310,000Arts & Culture$265,000Human Services$235,000Crime & Legal$195,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $350,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetNORTHWOODS MUSIC COLLABORATIVE INC: $240,000 over 5y, 58% of budgetSHERIDAN COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $220,000 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetSHERIDAN COMMUNITY LAND TRUST: $172,500 over 5y, 4.0% of budgetAmerica First Legal Foundation: $150,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetPRESERVE HICKORY: $137,000 over 4y, 90% of budgetKALAMAZOO COLLEGE: $135,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF THE EASTERN BIGHORNS INC: $122,500 over 5y, 4.3% of budgetWINGS OF MERCY INC: $100,000 over 5y, 4.6% of budgetTHE FOOD GROUP INC: $97,500 over 4y, 3.4% of budgetHOPE COLLEGE: $90,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTRAVERSE CITY CENTRAL ATHLETIC BOOSTERS: $87,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $85,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $82,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJOB CREATORS NETWORK FOUNDATION: $75,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetMUNSON HEALTHCARE FOUNDATIONS: $75,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetKEWEENAW LAND TRUST INC: $65,000 over 4y, 4.7% of budgetALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES: $60,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetSHERIDAN COMMUNITY TENNIS ASSOCIATION: $52,000 over 5y, 88% of budgetADVOCACY & RESOURCE CENTER: $50,000 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetDOG & CAT SHELTER INC: $50,000 over 5y, 1.6% of budgetCOMPASS CENTER FOR FAMILIES: $45,000 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetANTELOPE BUTTE FOUNDATION INC: $45,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetEVERY WOMAN'S PLACE INC: $40,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE LAKESHORE: $30,000 over 3y, 4.6% of budgetNORTH MUSKEGON BOOSTER CLUB INC: $30,000 over 2y, 22% of budgetOld Mission Peninsula Education Foundation: $25,000 over 3y, 10% of budgetAUTISM SUPPORT OF WEST SHORE INC: $25,000 over 2y, 32% of budgetDISCOVERY CENTER GREAT LAKES: $25,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetUPRISING: $20,000 over 2y, 4.0% of budgetSHERIDAN KIDS LIFE: $20,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetHOPE HOUSE FREE MEDICAL CLINIC: $15,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetThe Michigan American Legion Foundation: $15,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetCHAPS EQUINE ASSISTED SERVICES: $15,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS MICHIGAN CAPITAL REGION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetSHERIDAN PILOTS ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetLAGNIAPPE MINISTRIES: $10,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetROOTED IN WYOMING: $10,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetANGELS OF ACTION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF THE MUSKEGON LAKESHORE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE OF THE BIG HORNSINC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.5% 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 GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWOODS MUSIC COLLABORATIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds SHERIDAN COUNTY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SHERIDAN COMMUNITY LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds America First Legal Foundation ↗
  • Who funds PRESERVE HICKORY ↗
  • Who funds KALAMAZOO COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF THE EASTERN BIGHORNS INC ↗
  • Who funds WINGS OF MERCY INC ↗
  • Who funds THE FOOD GROUP INC ↗
  • Who funds HOPE COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds TRAVERSE CITY CENTRAL ATHLETIC BOOSTERS ↗
  • Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds JOB CREATORS NETWORK FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MUNSON HEALTHCARE FOUNDATIONS ↗
  • Who funds KEWEENAW LAND TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES ↗
  • Who funds SHERIDAN COMMUNITY TENNIS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds ADVOCACY & RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds DOG & CAT SHELTER INC ↗
  • Who funds COMPASS CENTER FOR FAMILIES ↗
  • Who funds ANTELOPE BUTTE FOUNDATION INC ↗

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.

Homer A Scott & Mildr…Wyoming Community Fou…First Interstate Banc…Homer A Jr & Janet Sc…Dan & Jeanne Scott Fa…Chandler H Kibbee and…Vernon & Rowena Griff…Muriel and Seymour Th…Joe and Arlene Watt F…The Seidler FoundationThe Roberts Family Fo…Bf & Rose H Perkins F…
Homer A Scott & Mildred S Scott FoundationWY34.6× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Homer A Scott & Mildred S Scott Foundation · Wyoming Community Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Homer A Jr & Janet Scott Family Foundation · Dan & Jeanne Scott Family Foundation · Chandler H Kibbee and Mercedes K Kibbee Foundation for Children · Vernon & Rowena Griffith Foundation · Muriel and Seymour Thickman Family Foundation · Joe and Arlene Watt Foundation Inc · The Seidler Foundation · The Roberts Family Foundation · Bf & Rose H Perkins 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 The Shaw & Betty Walker Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Shaw & Betty Walker Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Shaw & Betty Walker Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Shaw & Betty Walker 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.

    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 92 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 Shaw & Betty Walker’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