How much did ACCENT CHARITABLE FUND grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 64% of ACCENT CHARITABLE FUND’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

—

2019

alzheimer's

2020

grandgivesfood bankradiochicagorescue

2021

charityunrestrictedgivesplanned parenthoodgreater chicagofood bankrescue

2022

foodbankgreater chicagoyouth

2023

alsfood bankchicagoyouthaccessgroup

2024

educationcollierchildrenplanned parenthoodfood bankchicagoyouth

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 39 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k28 grants · $134k
$10k–50k11 grants · $195k

$7,500

Median grant

States reached

$1.2M

Total assets

Largest grants

PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC$31,500
EDUCATIONAL ACCESS GROUP$30,000
YOUTH SERVICES$30,000
GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY$22,500
CHILD'S PLAY$17,338
NORTHERN ILLINIOS FOOD BANK$12,000
CHRISTMAS COMMANDOS$11,607
MILE HIGH 360$10,000
THE SHELTER FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN$10,000
AMERICAN WRITERS MUSEUM$10,000
ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS USA$10,000
ERIKA'S LIGHTHOUSE$8,500
PICKLES GROUP$7,756
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY COLORADO$7,500
CHICAGO COALITION FOR FAMILY BUILDING$7,500

02The need

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY19–24, $98k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$1.4M · 44 repeat orgs$370k to everyone else

44 repeat relationships — 29 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$1.4M

$336k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%

+83%

Still filing today

48%

14%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesHealthPhilanthropyEducationInternationalFood & NutritionOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY
5× · 2020–2024 · $144k · revenue +97%
EA
EDUCATIONAL ACCESS GROUP
5× · 2018–2024 · $91k · revenue +128%
NI
NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK
3× · 2020–2022 · $57k · revenue +15%

Funded once

CG
COLORADO GIVES ORGANIZATION
one grant, 2022 · $83k
AR
AMERICAN RED CROSS
one grant, 2021 · $35k
MC
MESULAM CENTER FOR COGNITIVE NEUROLOGY AND ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE
one grant, 2019 · $25k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

A Better Chicago

A better chicago is changing how chicago fights poverty by investing in bold ideas that create opportunity for our youth

Human Services

Children's Advocates for Change

Children's advocates for change was organized to improve the lives of children in illinois by bringing about significant changes public policies and programs for children through research, policy analysis and advocacy, public education and…

Human Services

North Chicago Community Partners

Education

Feeding Illinois

To educate the public about the role of food banks in addressing hunger.

Food & Nutrition

Chicago United for Equity

Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.

Civil Rights

Chicago Foundation for Women

Chicago foundation for women (cfw) invests in women and girls as catalysts, building strong communities for all. the foundation envisions a world in which all women, girls, trans and gender non binary individuals have the opportunity to…

—

The Network Advocating Against Domestic

The Network is a group of 40+ member organizations dedicated to improving the lives of those impacted by gender-based violence through education, public policy and advocacy, and connecting community members with direct service providers.…

Human Services

Pitch in

Improve the lives of Chicago area children by providing long term support and services.

Philanthropy

Children's Home & Aid Society of Ill

We advance the well-being of children by investing in families to disrupt the systemic and multi-generational cycle of racial, social, and economic inequity.

Human Services

Chicago Toy & Game Foundation

—

Advocates for Illinois Children

Improve the lives of children in illinois by bringing about significant changes in public policies and programs for children through research, policy analysis and advocacy, public education and community outreach.

Human Services

Great Plains Food Bank

The Great Plains Food Bank is North Dakota's largest hunger-relief organization with a mission to end hunger through community partnerships. Our vision is a hunger-free North Dakota and western Minnesota. Both our mission and vision are…

Food & Nutrition

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Connections for the Homeless Inc and the most unlike its peers is Room to Read. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 26 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/36

the rest of the field

11%

7,683/72,323

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

33 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

33/33

Grantees still filing

31/33

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$1,162,127Food & Nutrition$201,000Education$138,497Human Services$97,939Health$65,487International$35,000Arts & Culture$30,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Baxter International FoundationIL21.3× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Baxter International Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Arthur J Gallagher Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Baird Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Synchrony Foundation · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Chubb Charitable Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organisation ACCENT CHARITABLE FUND funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

3get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: EDUCATIONAL ACCESS GROUP.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

high risk

~3 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 3 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

3 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.3× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 825151102 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on EDUCATIONAL ACCESS GROUP, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 3 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 18% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Accent Charitable Fund?

Find your warmest path to Accent Charitable Fund through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

ACCENT CHARITABLE FUND

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

33 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Accent Charitable Fund?

More from the funding graph

ACCENT CHARITABLE FUND

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

33 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Accent Charitable Fund?

More from the funding graph