Skip to content
ACT of Hope Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

ACT of Hope 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.

$110k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Employment$320kFood & Nutrition$160kEnvironment$154kHousing & Shelter$145kEducation$3kAnimals$3kHealth$3kYouth Development$3k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$30,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Inspiration Corporation$30,000
Cara Program$30,000
Growing Home Inc$30,000
Greater Chicago Food Depository$20,000
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, $145k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Inspiration Corporation: $40k → 14%Inspiration Corporation: $40k → 14%Inspiration Corporation: $35k → 14%Inspiration Corporation: $30k → 14%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.
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.
$776k · 5 repeat orgs$15k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
5

Total granted

$776k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
+64%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EmploymentFood & NutritionEnvironmentHuman ServicesHealthAnimalsOther
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

  • GH
    GROWING HOME INC
    5× · 2020–2025 · $190k · revenue +40%
  • GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY
    5× · 2020–2025 · $160k · revenue +17%
  • ER
    EVANSTON REBUILDING WAREHOUSE
    4× · 2020–2024 · $151k · revenue +213%

Funded once

  • START EARLYgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +64%
  • EL
    Erikas Lighthouse A Beacon of Hope for Adolescent Depressiongraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +190%
  • BB
    BIG BROTHERS-BIG SISTERS OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +6%
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
True Chicago
Arts & Culture
2
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
3
Live Free Chicago

Live Free Illinois is a statewide organization partnering with over 120 congregations and directly impacted individuals to build safer more equitable communities across Illinois. Operating at the intersection of criminal justice reform and…

—
4
The Veterans Exchange

Employment support and exchange for veterans

—
5
Local Economic and Employment Development Council Inc

North Branch Works is a membership-supported nonprofit neighborhood organization that for more than three decades has promoted balanced, job-creating economic development along the North Branch of the Chicago River.

Employment
6
Plant Chicago Nfp

Plant Chicago's mission is to cultivate local circular economies. We envision a paradigm shift in production, consumption, and waste driven at the local level, generating equity and economic opportunity for all residents.

Food & Nutrition
7
Chicago United for Equity

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

Civil Rights
8
I Grow Chicago Nfp

The mission of I Grow Chicago is to grow Englewood from surviving to thriving through community connection, skill building, and opportunity.

—
9
Green Chicago Restaurant Coalition

Green Chicago Restaurant Coalition's Guaranteed Green Sustainability Education Program educates foodservice operators about assessing the present state of their operation's environmental sustainability and helps them to develop a plan to…

—
10
Chicago's Green City Market Program

Green city market is securing the future of food by deepening support for sustainable farmers, educating our community, and expanding access to locally-grown food.

Food & Nutrition
11
Students Run Chicago
Health
12
Chicago Votes

Chicago Votes is a non-partisan, non-profit organization building a more inclusive democracy by putting power in the hands of young Chicagoans. We're engaging and developing a new generation of leaders by opening the doors of government,…

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greater Chicago Food Depository; the most unlike its peers is Evanston Rebuilding Warehouse. 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

10 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.

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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
10/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GROWING HOME INC: $190,000 · EmploymentGROWING HOME INCThe Cara Program: $130,000 · EmploymentThe Cara ProgramGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $160,000 · Food & NutritionGREATER CHICAGO FOOD D…EVANSTON REBUILDING WAREHOUSE: $150,500 · EnvironmentEVANSTON REBUILDING W…Inspiration Corporation: $145,000 · Human ServicesInspiration Corporat…START EARLY: $3,000 · OtherBIG BROTHERS-BIG SISTERS OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $3,000 · OtherOPENLANDS: $3,000 · OtherErikas Lighthouse A Beacon of Hope for Adolescent Depression: $3,000 · HealthPAWS CHICAGO: $3,000 · Animals
Employment$320,000Food & Nutrition$160,000Environment$150,500Human Services$145,000Other$9,000Health$3,000Animals$3,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGROWING HOME INC: $190,000 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $160,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetEVANSTON REBUILDING WAREHOUSE: $150,500 over 4y, 2.8% of budgetInspiration Corporation: $145,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetThe Cara Program: $130,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetSTART EARLY: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetErikas Lighthouse A Beacon of Hope for Adolescent Depression: $3,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBIG BROTHERS-BIG SISTERS OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOPENLANDS: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAWS CHICAGO: $3,000 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.

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.

John D and Catherine …The Chicago Community…National Philanthropi…Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
John D and Catherine T MacarthurIL13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: John D and Catherine T Macarthur · The Chicago Community Trust · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 ACT of Hope Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from ACT of Hope Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 ACT of Hope Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to ACT of Hope 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 10 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 ACT of Hope’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