Skip to content
Walker Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

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.

$565k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$127k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$1.1MArts & Culture$580kHealth$352kEducation$165kInternational$63kReligion$60kHousing & Shelter$26kPublic Safety & Disaster$21kOther$0
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $74k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $479k
$25,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$8.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INDIGENOUS EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF TANZANIA$127,000
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICE OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY$120,000
EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE$105,000
CASCADIA ART MUSEUM$76,750
MARYVILLE UNIVERSITY WALKER CLINIC$50,000
MEDS & FOOD FOR KIDS$25,000
RANKEN TECHNICAL COLLEGE$25,000
ST HILDA ST PARTICK CHURCH$12,425
BEYOND HOUSING INC$11,200
LIFE ENRICHMENT OPTIONS (LEO)$5,000
SNO-ISLE LIBRARIES FOUNDATION$3,000
SUPPORT 7$2,500
COAST GUARD FOUNDATION$1,500
ARK INSTITUTE OF LEARNING$200
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 (FY17–25, $1.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 57% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%INDIGENOUS EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF TANZANIA: $127k → 11%CASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $120k → 9%INDIGENOUS EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF TANZANIA: $100k → 11%CASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $101k → 9%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $105k → 15%INDIGENOUS EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF TANZANIA: $100k → 11%YMCA OF GREATER SEATTLE: $2k → 9%CASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $101k → 9%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $60k → 15%INDIGENOUS EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF TANZANIA: $95k → 11%CASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $77k → 9%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $5k → 15%INDIGENOUS EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF TANZANIA: $70k → 11%CASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $50k → 9%EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $2k → 15%INDIGENOUS EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF TANZANIA: $60k → 11%YMCA OF GREATER SEATTLE: $2k → 9%CASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $50k → 9%INDIGENOUS EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF TANZANIA: $48k → 11%CASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $25k → 9%CASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $25k → 9%CASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $24k → 9%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

WA
WI
MI
IN
CT
CA
CO
NE
MO
AZ
TX
FL
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 37% of Walker Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 47% of the giving stays in WA; by stated purpose, 27%.

Walker Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.9M · 25 repeat orgs$49k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +28% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

25 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
14

Total granted

$2.9M
$49k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
0%

Still filing today

56%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Human ServicesEducationArts & CulturePublic BenefitPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • DV
    DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES OF SNOHOMISH
    6× · 2020–2025 · $625k · revenue +45%
  • CA
    CASCADIA ART MUSEUM
    9× · 2017–2025 · $574k · revenue +380%
  • TC
    TUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE
    4× · 2020–2025 · $172k · revenue +69%

Funded once

  • IE
    INDIGENOUS EDUCATION FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $35k
  • AE
    AFTON EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $3k
  • FH
    FLOWER HILL FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $3k
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
Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum

We inspire people to live in harmony with the natural world by fostering love, appreciation, and understanding of the sonoran desert.

Arts & Culture
2
Maryhill Museum of Art

Maryhill Museum of Art ignites a journey of educational enrichment in the Columbia River Gorge by preserving and interpreting art and historic collections.

Arts & Culture
3
American Museum of Natural History

The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."

Arts & Culture
4
Museum of Northwest Art

The museum of northwest art collects, preserves, interprets and exhibits art created in the pacific northwest, supports artists, and strives to integrate art into the lives of all people. the museum is free and open to the public seven…

Arts & Culture
5
Bainbridge Island Museum of Art

Bainbridge island museum of art (bima) inspires curiosity, wonder and understanding by connecting people with the contemporary art and craft of the puget sound region.

Arts & Culture
6
Tucson Museum of Art and Historic Block Inc

The tucson museum of art and historic block connects art to life through meaningful and engaging experiences that inspire discovery, spark creativity, and promote cultural understanding.

Arts & Culture
7
Asian Art Museum Foundation of San Francisco

The asian art museum celebrates, preserves, and promotes asian and asian american art and cultures for local and global audiences. we provide a dynamic forum for exchanging ideas, inviting collaboration, and fueling imagination to deepen…

Arts & Culture
8
Boise Art Museum Inc

To create visual arts experiences that engage people and inspire learning through exceptional exhibitions, collections, and educational opportunities.

Arts & Culture
9
Museum of Arts and Design

To collect, display and interpret objects in craft art and design.

Arts & Culture
10
Tacoma Art Museum

Tacoma Art Museum transforms our communities by sharing art that inspires broader perspectives and cultivates a compassionate future

Arts & Culture
11
Monterey Museum of Art

The monterey museum of art cultivates curiosity in the visual arts and engages community with the diversity of california art - past, present, and future.

Arts & Culture
12
Missoula Art Museum

Public art exhibitions and education. missoula art museum serves the public by engaging audiences and artists in the exploration of contemporary art relevant to the community, state, and region.

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Coast Guard Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Flower Hill Foundation Austin Texas. 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

21 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. 21 of the 39 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)
21/21
Grantees still filing
12/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES OF SNOHOMISH: $625,000 · Human ServicesDOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES OF SNOHOMISHORKEESWA INC: $599,500 · Human ServicesORKEESWA INCCASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $573,550 · Human ServicesCASCADIA ART MUSEUMTUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $171,500 · Human ServicesTUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC A…+1 more: $3,000 · Human ServicesMARYVILLE UNIVERSITY WALKER CLINIC: $365,000 · OtherMARYVILLE UNIVERSITY WA…MUSEUM OF GLASS: $56,250 · OtherMUSEUM OF GLASSST HILDA ST PARTICK CHURCH: $51,375 · OtherST HILDA ST PARTICK CHU…INDIGENOUS EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $35,000 · OtherINDIGENOUS EDUCATION FO…ALL SAINTS' EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $21,000 · Other+20 more: $78,850 · Other+20 moreRanken Technical College: $138,000 · EducationSNO-ISLE LIBRARIES FOUNDATION: $17,000 · Education+1 more: $690 · EducationMEDS & FOOD FOR KIDS: $87,500 · InternationalBEYOND HOUSING INC: $36,200 · Housing & ShelterPETER MICHAEL FOUNDATION: $31,000 · PhilanthropyMuseum of Glass: $24,400 · Arts & Culture+2 more: $300 · Arts & Culture
Human Services$1,972,550Other$607,475Education$155,690International$87,500Housing & Shelter$36,200Philanthropy$31,000Arts & Culture$24,700

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 budgetDOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES OF SNOHOMISH: $625,000 over 6y, 3.8% of budgetORKEESWA INC: $599,500 over 7y, 7.7% of budgetCASCADIA ART MUSEUM: $573,550 over 9y, 14% of budgetTUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE: $171,500 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetRanken Technical College: $138,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetMEDS & FOOD FOR KIDS: $87,500 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetBEYOND HOUSING INC: $36,200 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetPETER MICHAEL FOUNDATION: $31,000 over 5y, 4.3% of budgetMuseum of Glass: $24,400 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetSUPPORT 7: $17,500 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetSNO-ISLE LIBRARIES FOUNDATION: $17,000 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetCOAST GUARD FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTHE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER SEATTLE (6871): $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPREDATORS OF THE HEART DBA BECAUSE WE MATTER EXOTIC ANIMAL RES: $1,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetThe Amerind Foundation Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFlower Hill Foundation Austin Texas: $1,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetFRIENDS OF SABINO CANYON INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetOPEN MEDICINE FOUNDATION: $700 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetARK INSTITUTE OF LEARNING: $690 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTUCSON DESERT ART MUSEUM INC: $250 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $50 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 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES OF SNOHOMISH ↗
  • Who funds ORKEESWA INC ↗
  • Who funds CASCADIA ART MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds TUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE ↗
  • Who funds Ranken Technical College ↗
  • Who funds MEDS & FOOD FOR KIDS ↗
  • Who funds BEYOND HOUSING INC ↗
  • Who funds PETER MICHAEL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Museum of Glass ↗
  • Who funds SUPPORT 7 ↗
  • Who funds SNO-ISLE LIBRARIES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds COAST GUARD FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER SEATTLE (6871) ↗
  • Who funds PREDATORS OF THE HEART DBA BECAUSE WE MATTER EXOTIC ANIMAL RES ↗
  • Who funds The Amerind Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds Flower Hill Foundation Austin Texas ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF SABINO CANYON INC ↗
  • Who funds OPEN MEDICINE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ARK INSTITUTE OF LEARNING ↗
  • Who funds TUCSON DESERT ART MUSEUM INC ↗
  • Who funds INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS ↗

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 Norcliffe Foundat…Shell USA Company Fou…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Vanguard Charitable E…The Blackbaud Giving …Network for GoodNational Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …The Bank of America C…Natl Christian Charit…
The Norcliffe FoundationWA15.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Norcliffe Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn 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 Walker Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Walker Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%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
    1get no government money at all
    5report 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.

    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 39 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 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