Skip to content
Amber Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Amber Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$37k
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$190kArts & Culture$54kPhilanthropy$31kRecreation & Sports$6kInternational$6kCrime & Legal$4kHealth$500Food & Nutrition$500Other$0
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
$1,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$714k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WOLCOTT SCHOOL$25,000
NEW YORK THEATER BARN$7,000
SEE CHICAGO DANCE$1,500
GLENBROOK SOUTH HIGH SCHOOL$1,000
ELYSSAS MISSION$1,000
Jewish National Fund$1,000
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 (FY20–20, $250) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%STARS FAMILY SERVICES: $250 → 7%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$276k · 8 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +38% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
8

Total granted

$276k
$11k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
+7%

Still filing today

75%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Arts & CulturePhilanthropyEducationCrime & LegalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • WS
    WOLCOTT SCHOOL
    7× · 2018–2024 · $182k · revenue +38%
  • NY
    New York Theatre Barn Incorporated
    8× · 2017–2024 · $41k · revenue +611%
  • JU
    JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
    4× · 2017–2022 · $21k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • R9
    RESPECT 90 FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $6k · revenue -54%
  • MY
    Midwest Young Artists
    one grant, 2018 · $3k · revenue +7%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $600
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
Move(Nyc) Foundation Inc

Move|nyc| is a civic arts and social justice organization committed to cultivating a more diverse and inclusive society through transforming the field of professional dance. more than an arts organization, move|nyc| is a movement for…

Public Benefit
2
Open Space Arts

Open Space Arts is a Chicago-based nonprofit dedicated to producing bold LGBTQ-focused theater and presenting independent queer cinema. The organization supports emerging and established artists while engaging audiences through live…

Arts & Culture
3
Los Angeles International Dance Festival
—
4
Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago

Federation amplifies our collective strength to make the world a better place for everyone. we assist people in need, impact chicagoans of all faiths; support israel and the jewish people worldwide; respond swiftly to crises; cultivate…

Philanthropy
5
Chicago City Theatre Company dba Joel Hall Dancers & Center

To enrich the lives of our community through dance education and performance while developing Chicago's native talent pool in a welcoming environment that celebrates multiculturalism & ethnic diversity.

Arts & Culture
6
Jewish Child and Family Services

JCFS Chicago services and programs support wellbeing for children, teens, adults and families regardless of race, culture, religion, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, or…

Human Services
7
The Young Men's and Young Women's Hebrew Association

For over 150 years, the 92nd street y, new york has been serving its communities and the larger world by bringing people together (continued on schedule o)and providing exceptional, groundbreaking programs in the performing and visual…

Religion
8
Judah Performing Arts Company

Support dancers and the performing arts

Arts & Culture
9
Students Run Chicago
Health
10
Joseph and Malka Melohn Foundation
—
11
National Dance Institute

The purposes of the corporation are to introduce and foster the arts into the experience, participation and knowledge of children using dance as a catalyst; promote the belief that the arts are primary and vital in our society and should…

Arts & Culture
12
Danceworks Chicago Inc Nfp

To build a foundation for the individual artistic growth of dancers and choreographers, providing a laboratory from which early career artists propel themselves and the art form to a new level through training, collaboration, mentorship,…

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wolcott School; the most unlike its peers is New York Theatre Barn Incorporated. 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

12 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 17 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)
10/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WOLCOTT SCHOOL: $182,000 · EducationWOLCOTT SCHOOLNew York Theatre Barn Incorporated: $41,250 · Arts & CultureNew York Theatre Bar…Audience Architects NFP dba See Chicago Dance: $5,000 · Arts & CultureAudience Architects …EISENHOWER DANCE ENSEMBLE INC: $4,500 · Arts & CultureEISENHOWER DANCE ENS…Midwest Young Artists: $3,000 · Arts & CultureMidwest Young Artist…ACWIS: $10,000 · OtherACWISGlenbrook South High School: $8,000 · OtherGlenbrook…RESPECT 90 FOUNDATION: $6,000 · OtherRESPECT 9…+4 more: $1,300 · OtherJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $21,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $500 · PhilanthropyJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $6,000 · InternationalElyssas Mission NFP: $4,000 · Crime & LegalStars Family Services: $250 · Human Services
Education$182,000Arts & Culture$53,750Other$25,300Philanthropy$21,500International$6,000Crime & Legal$4,000Human Services$250

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 budgetWOLCOTT SCHOOL: $182,000 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetNew York Theatre Barn Incorporated: $41,250 over 8y, 12% of budgetJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $21,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAudience Architects NFP dba See Chicago Dance: $5,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetEISENHOWER DANCE ENSEMBLE INC: $4,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetElyssas Mission NFP: $4,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetMidwest Young Artists: $3,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetRENEE ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSHARE OUR STRENGTH: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetStars Family Services: $250 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.

The Chicago Community…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Chicago Community TrustIL13.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Amber Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Amber Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%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
    4report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Amber Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Amber 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 17 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 Amber’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