Skip to content

· Private foundation

Aldo K Germann Trust Ti-Trust Inc

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.

$20k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$7k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$52kHealth$37kEducation$16kReligion$14kFood & Nutrition$13kArts & Culture$13kRecreation & Sports$9kAnimals$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$482k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHADDOCK CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION$7,000
ST LUKE'S HOSPITAL$6,000
HINSDALE HUMANE SOCIETY$2,000
NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK$2,000
CLARENDON HILLS PUBLIC LIBRARY$2,000
BLESSING FOUNDATION INC$1,147
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, $49k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CHADDOCK CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $7k → 13%CHADDOCK CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $7k → 13%CHADDOCK CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $6k → 13%CHADDOCK CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $6k → 13%CHADDOCK CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $6k → 13%CHADDOCK CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $6k → 13%CHADDOCK CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $6k → 13%CHADDOCK CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $4k → 13%ST ANDREWS RESOURCES FOR SENIORS: $1k → 11%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.
$160k · 12 repeat orgs$3k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +67% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
2

Total granted

$160k
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+67%
0%

Still filing today

58%
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 ServicesArts & CultureFood & NutritionPhilanthropyAnimalsHealthOther
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

  • CC
    CHADDOCK CHILDRENS FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2025 · $48k · revenue +479%
  • NI
    NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK
    9× · 2017–2025 · $13k · revenue +43%
  • QS
    QUINCY SOCIETY OF FINE ARTS
    3× · 2017–2019 · $8k · revenue +67%

Funded once

  • SU
    SALEM-IN-BALLWIN UNITED METHODIST
    one grant, 2017 · $2k
  • SA
    ST ANDREWS RESOURCES FOR SENIORS
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue 0%
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
Chicago Municipal Employee's Credit Union

To give members the ability to control their financial destiny by providing members with the means to satisfy their needs for financial services in a comfortable family-like environment. in doing so, the credit union strives to maintain…

—
2
The Credit Union for All

The credit union provides security of savings and selected financial services to its members in a convenient, responsive manner, at competitive rates, while maintaining financial stability and capital growth within the association.

—
3
The Sinnissippi Foundation

To support and promote mental health services in the four counties of carroll, lee, ogle, and whiteside.

—
4
Chicago Dental Society

The health of the public, to promote the art and science of dentistry and to represent the interest of the members of the profession and the public which it serves.

Community Improvement
5
Sinnissippi Centers Inc

It is the mission of sinnissippi centers, inc. to provide quality, coordinated and responsive behavioral healthcare services to individuals, families and the communities we serve.

Health
6
Naperville Heritage Society

To collect and preserve the history of naperville, illinois, for the present and future, sharing it with the community through preservation, programming, exhibition, and educational experiences. naper settlement seeks to be a community…

Arts & Culture
7
Illinois Health Care Association

To lead in advocacy and education for our members in illinois. services include annual convention, educational seminars, various industry newsletters, and other services.

—
8
Illinois Health and Hospital Association

To advocate for and support hospitals and health systems as they serve patients and communities in illinois.

—
9
Chicago Dental Society Foundation

Improve oral health by providing funds for dental education and access to care programs

Philanthropy
10
The Illinois Saint Andrew Society

To nourish scottish identity through service, fellowship, and celebration of scottish culture.

Human Services
11
Hospice of Southern Illinois Inc

Care to terminal patients/families

Human Services
12
St Andrews Charitable Foundation

To improve the quality of life for seniors in need through reliable and compassionate care.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chaddock Childrens Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Clarendon Hills Historical Society. 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

8 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. 8 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
8/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST LUKE'S HOSPITAL: $31,000 · OtherST LUKE'S HOSPITALCLARENDON HILLS PUBLIC LIBRARY: $16,000 · OtherCLARENDON HILLS PUBLIC LIBRARYGRACE LUTHERAN CHURCH OF LA GRANGE: $12,000 · OtherGRACE LUTHERAN CHURCH OF LA GRANGECLARENDON HILLS PARK DISTRICT: $9,000 · OtherCLARENDON HILLS PARK DISTRICTTHE SALVATION ARMY: $3,674 · Other+1 more: $1,949 · OtherCHADDOCK CHILDRENS FOUNDATION: $47,771 · Human ServicesCHADDOCK CHILDRENS FOUNDATION+1 more: $1,000 · Human ServicesNORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK: $13,000 · Food & NutritionNORTHERN …QUINCY SOCIETY OF FINE ARTS: $7,904 · Arts & CultureCLARENDON HILLS HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $5,000 · Arts & CultureTHE BLESSING FOUNDATION INC: $6,104 · HealthHINSDALE HUMANE SOCIETY: $6,000 · AnimalsSHOW-ME INSTITUTE: $3,000 · Philanthropy
Other$73,623Human Services$48,771Food & Nutrition$13,000Arts & Culture$12,904Health$6,104Animals$6,000Philanthropy$3,000

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 budgetCHADDOCK CHILDRENS FOUNDATION: $47,771 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetNORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK: $13,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetQUINCY SOCIETY OF FINE ARTS: $7,904 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetTHE BLESSING FOUNDATION INC: $6,104 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHINSDALE HUMANE SOCIETY: $6,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCLARENDON HILLS HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $5,000 over 4y, 32% of budgetSHOW-ME INSTITUTE: $3,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetST ANDREWS RESOURCES FOR SENIORS: $1,000 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.

  • Who funds CHADDOCK CHILDRENS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds QUINCY SOCIETY OF FINE ARTS ↗
  • Who funds THE BLESSING FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds HINSDALE HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds CLARENDON HILLS HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds SHOW-ME INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds ST ANDREWS RESOURCES FOR SENIORS ↗

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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Aldo K Germann Trust Ti-Trust Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Aldo K Germann Trust Ti-Trust Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Aldo K Germann Trust Ti-Trust’s filings →

    More from the funding graph