Skip to content
Willis & Nancy King Fdn at a glance

· Private foundation

Willis & Nancy King Fdn

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$160k
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Human Services$325kEducation$240kHousing & Shelter$95kReligion$75kFood & Nutrition$70kHealth$30kYouth Development$30k
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $150k
$10,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FAMILY & CHILDRENS SERVICES$35,000
DICKERSON COLLEGE$25,000
REBUILDING TOGETHER$20,000
INTERFAITH FOOD PANTRY$15,000
MISERICORDIA HOME$15,000
MARYMOUNT MANHATTAN COLLEGE$10,000
CENTER FOR TOURETTE SYNDROME$10,000
SINTE GLESKA UNIVERSITY$10,000
RETREAT FOR YOUNG WOMEN$10,000
CASA OF MORRIS & SUSSEX$5,000
WINGS$5,000
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 (FY19–24, $290k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 26% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%MISERICORDIA HOME: $15k → 14%MISERICORDIA HOME: $15k → 14%MISERICORDIA HOME: $15k → 14%MISERICORDIA HOME: $10k → 14%FAMILY & CHILDRENS SERVICES: $40k → 10%MISERICORDIA HOME: $10k → 14%FAMILY & CHILDRENS SERVICES: $35k → 10%MISERICORDIA HOME: $10k → 14%FAMILY & CHILDRENS SERVICES: $35k → 10%FAMILY & CHILDRENS SERVICES: $35k → 10%FAMILY & CHILDRENS SERVICES: $35k → 10%FAMILY & CHILDRENS SERVICES: $35k → 10%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.
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 7% of Willis & Nancy King Fdn’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Willis & Nancy King Fdnlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 6.9% directed abroad (not shown)
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$840k · 13 repeat orgs$25k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
1

Total granted

$840k
$25k

Still filing today

54%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesEducationHousing & ShelterFood & NutritionHealthOther
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

  • RT
    REBUILDING TOGETHER NORTH SUBURBAN CHICAGO
    6× · 2019–2024 · $95k · revenue +38%
  • MH
    MISERICORDIA HOME
    6× · 2019–2024 · $75k · revenue +60%
  • IF
    INTERFAITH FOOD PANTRY INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $70k · revenue +74%

Funded once

  • DC
    DICKERSON COLLEGE
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
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
05the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 14 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
4/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Family and Children's Services Inc: $215,000 · Human ServicesFamily and Children's Services IncMISERICORDIA HOME: $75,000 · Human ServicesMISERICORDIA HOMERETREATS FOR YOUNG WOMEN: $60,000 · OtherRETREATS FOR YOUNG WOMENSINTE GLESKA COLLEGE CENTER INC: $60,000 · OtherSINTE GLESKA COLLEGE CENTER …CASA OF MORRIS & SUSSEX: $30,000 · OtherCASA OF MORRIS & SUSSEXDICKERSON COLLEGE: $25,000 · OtherDICKERSON COLLEGECENTER FOR TOURETTE SYNDROME: $20,000 · OtherCENTER FOR TOURETTE SYNDROMEALBERT ANTHONY KAYAL FOUNDATION: $15,000 · OtherALBERT ANTHONY KAYAL FOUNDAT…WINGS: $10,000 · OtherTHE ONE LOVE FOUNDATION IN HONOR OF YEARDLEY LOVE INC: $120,000 · EducationTHE ONE LOVE FOUNDATION…MARYMOUNT MANHATTAN COLLEGE: $60,000 · EducationMARYMOUNT MANHATTAN COL…REBUILDING TOGETHER NORTH SUBURBAN CHICAGO: $95,000 · Housing & ShelterREBUILDING T…INTERFAITH FOOD PANTRY INC: $70,000 · Food & NutritionINTERFAIT…INSTITUTE FOR COMMUNITY LIVING INC: $10,000 · Health
Human Services$290,000Other$220,000Education$180,000Housing & Shelter$95,000Food & Nutrition$70,000Health$10,000

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 budgetFamily and Children's Services Inc: $215,000 over 6y, 2.8% of budgetTHE ONE LOVE FOUNDATION IN HONOR OF YEARDLEY LOVE INC: $120,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetREBUILDING TOGETHER NORTH SUBURBAN CHICAGO: $95,000 over 6y, 3.6% of budgetMISERICORDIA HOME: $75,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetINTERFAITH FOOD PANTRY INC: $70,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetMARYMOUNT MANHATTAN COLLEGE: $60,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR COMMUNITY LIVING INC: $10,000 over 2y, 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 Family and Children's Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE ONE LOVE FOUNDATION IN HONOR OF YEARDLEY LOVE INC ↗
  • Who funds REBUILDING TOGETHER NORTH SUBURBAN CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds MISERICORDIA HOME ↗
  • Who funds INTERFAITH FOOD PANTRY INC ↗
  • Who funds MARYMOUNT MANHATTAN COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds INSTITUTE FOR COMMUNITY LIVING 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.

Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.4× 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 Willis & Nancy King Fdn funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Willis & Nancy King Fdn. 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%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 78%
  • Family and Children's Services Inc: 78% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 14 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 Willis & Nancy King Fdn’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