Skip to content
An and Pearl G Barnett Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

An and Pearl G Barnett Family 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.

$158k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$60k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Arts & Culture$523kHuman Services$251kReligion$17kRecreation & Sports$12kEmployment$10kEducation$10kFood & Nutrition$7kInternational$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k6 grants · $27k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $72k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $60k
$6,325
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MERIT SCHOOL OF MUSIC$60,000
UKRAINIAN INSTITUTE OF MODERN ART$32,000
THE PEOPLES MUSIC SCHOOL$27,500
CHICAGO PARKS FOUNDATION$12,000
OLD TOWN SCHOOL OF MUSIC$6,325
CHICAGO SCHOOL OF MUSIC$6,000
NOURISHING HOPE$6,000
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$4,000
SAFEPLACE INTERNATIONAL$2,500
SECOND PRESBYTARIAN CHURCH$2,000
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 (FY17–23, $251k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HOUSE OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD: $3k → 14%JEWISH CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES: $63k → 14%JEWISH CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES: $63k → 14%JEWISH CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES: $60k → 14%JEWISH CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES: $29k → 14%JEWISH CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES: $15k → 14%JEWISH CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES: $14k → 14%JEWISH CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES: $1k → 14%CJE SENIORLIFE: $1k → 14%CJE SENIORLIFE: $1k → 14%CJE SENIORLIFE: $1k → 14%CJE SENIORLIFE: $1k → 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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$719k · 11 repeat orgs$121k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +43% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
9

Total granted

$719k
$50k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+15%

Still filing today

82%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $71k 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 & CultureHuman ServicesInternationalFood & NutritionEducationRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • JC
    Jewish Child and Family Services
    7× · 2017–2023 · $244k · revenue +43%
  • MS
    MERIT SCHOOL OF MUSIC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $185k · revenue +113%
  • TP
    The People's Music School
    3× · 2022–2024 · $50k · revenue +66%

Funded once

  • 8I
    826CHI INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +50%
  • CA
    CHICAGO ARTS PARTNERSHIP
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • CR
    CONGREGATION RODFEI ZEDEK
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
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 Sinfonietta Inc

Chicago Sinfonietta is a professional orchestra dedicated to modeling and promoting diversity, inclusion, and both racial and cultural equity in the arts through the universal language of symphonic music. Our core values are built around…

Arts & Culture
2
Chamber Opera of Chicago
—
3
The Chicago High School for the Arts

The chicago high school for the arts (chiarts) develops the next generation of diverse, artistically promising scholar-artists through intensive pre-professional training in the arts, combined with a comprehensive college preparatory…

Education
4
Chicago Opera Theater

Chicago opera theater expands the tradition of opera as a living art form by engaging lovers of music and storytelling through innovative experiences, predominantly of new and rarely performed works.

Arts & Culture
5
Cedille Chicago Nfp

Cedille Chicago, NFP is devoted to the activity of producing and marketing recordings of classical music by Chicago-area musicians and composers.

Arts & Culture
6
Chicago Jazz Philharmonic

To present high quality arts programming and musical performances that will educate, enrich and improve the quality of life for the diverse Chicago cultural communities and beyond.

—
7
Illinois Philharmonic Orchestra

Illinois Philharmonic Orchestra's mission as a professional orchestra is to utilize the universal expression of music to create profound, inspiring, and personal connections between the people and communities of Chicagos Southland.

Arts & Culture
8
The Chicago Philharmonic Society

To excite, engage, and transform diverse audiences with the beauty and power of music.

Arts & Culture
9
Chicago Harp Quartet
—
10
True Chicago
Arts & Culture
11
Chicago Humanities Festival

To promote public appreciation, understanding and support of the humanities through festivals and educational programs.

Arts & Culture
12
Lyric Opera of Chicago

We believe in the life-changing, transformational, revelatory power of great art and opera. Lyric Opera of Chicago exists to provide a broad, deep, and relevant cultural service to the Chicago region and the nation, and to advance the…

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Music Institute of Chicago; the most unlike its peers is Safe Place International. 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

20 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. 20 of the 28 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
12/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MERIT SCHOOL OF MUSIC: $185,000 · Arts & CultureMERIT SCHOOL OF MUSICCHICAGO SHAKESPEARE THEATER: $100,000 · Arts & CultureCHICAGO SHAKESPEARE THEATERClassical Music Chicago: $80,000 · Arts & CultureClassical Music ChicagoThe People's Music School: $50,000 · Arts & CultureThe People's Music School+4 more: $8,075 · Arts & CultureJewish Child and Family Services: $244,478 · Human ServicesJewish Child and Family Services+2 more: $7,000 · Human ServicesINTERNATIONAL CONTEMPORARY ENSEMBLE: $50,000 · OtherINTERNATIONAL CON…UKRAINIAN INSTITUTE OF MODERN ART: $32,000 · OtherUKRAINIAN INSTITU…CHICAGO ARTS PARTNERSHIP: $10,000 · OtherCHICAGO ARTS PART…CONGREGATION RODFEI ZEDEK: $10,000 · OtherCONGREGATION RODF…NOURISHING HOPE: $6,000 · OtherCHICAGO SCHOOL OF MUSIC: $6,000 · OtherST PAULS UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST: $5,000 · Other+4 more: $8,350 · Other+4 moreCHICAGO PARKS FOUNDATION: $12,000 · Recreation & Sports826CHI INC: $10,000 · EducationSKILLS FOR CHICAGO: $10,000 · EmploymentSafe Place International: $2,500 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $2,000 · InternationalGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $1,350 · Food & Nutrition
Arts & Culture$423,075Human Services$251,478Other$127,350Recreation & Sports$12,000Education$10,000Employment$10,000International$4,500Food & Nutrition$1,350

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 budgetJewish Child and Family Services: $244,478 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetMERIT SCHOOL OF MUSIC: $185,000 over 7y, 2.3% of budgetCHICAGO SHAKESPEARE THEATER: $100,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetClassical Music Chicago: $80,000 over 2y, 5.8% of budgetThe People's Music School: $50,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetUKRAINIAN INSTITUTE OF MODERN ART: $32,000 over 1y, 7.1% of budgetCHICAGO PARKS FOUNDATION: $12,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budget826CHI INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetSKILLS FOR CHICAGO: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetOLD TOWN SCHOOL OF FOLK MUSIC: $6,325 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNOURISHING HOPE: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOUNCIL FOR JEWISH ELDERLY: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHouse of the Good Shepherd: $3,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSafe Place International: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $2,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $1,350 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetLUMINARTS CULTURAL FOUNDATION THE UNION LEAGUE CLUB OF CHICAGO: $1,250 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetChicago Symphony Orchestra: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMUSIC OF THE BAROQUE: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMUSIC INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO: $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…John D and Catherine …Ncrc Community Develo…The Negaunee Foundati…John R Halligan Chari…The Irving Harris Fou…Jewish Federation of …Morgan Stanley Global…The Ayco Charitable F…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…The Bank of America C…
The Chicago Community TrustIL22.4× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Ncrc Community Development Fund Inc · The Negaunee Foundation · John R Halligan Charitable Fund · The Irving Harris Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc

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 An and Pearl G Barnett Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from An and Pearl G Barnett Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 An and Pearl G Barnett Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to An and Pearl G Barnett Family 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 28 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 An and Pearl G Barnett Family’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