Skip to content
Aurora Women's Empowerment Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Aurora Women's Empowerment Foundation

To elevate and empower aurora-area women and future women by making grants to tax-exempt nonprofits engaged in meaningful, measurable work that helps women over the hurdles of inequity and exclusion, propelling them forward with life-changing programs and services.

$226k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Youth Development$287kArts & Culture$181kEmployment$150kHealth$123kCommunity Improvement$100kPhilanthropy$78kEducation$69kHuman Services$50kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $162k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$6.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PARAMOUNT ARTS CENTRE INC$50,000
VNA HEALTH CARE$45,000
WEST AURORA A FOUNDATION$29,925
IMPERFECT ANGELS ORGANIZATION$25,000
FAMILY FOCUS$25,000
ALIVE CENTER NFP$20,000
SIMPLY DESTINEE$16,666
IMSA FUND FOR ADVANCEMENT OF$7,500
Individual grant recipient$7,250
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 (FY23–25, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 70% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%FAMILY FOCUS: $25k → 14%SAFE FAMILIES FOR CHILDREN ALLIANCE: $10k → 14%DVSA COMMUNITIES: $8k → 8%DVSA COMMUNITIES: $8k → 8%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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$945k · 11 repeat orgs$95k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +50% since the first grant, against +18% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
8

Total granted

$945k
$56k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+18%

Still filing today

91%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k went to new ones.

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

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

’21’22’23’24’25
Youth DevelopmentHuman ServicesArts & CulturePhilanthropyEmploymentHealthOther
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

  • PA
    PARAMOUNT ARTS CENTRE
    4× · 2022–2025 · $175k · revenue +57%
  • FA
    FARMWORKER AND LANDSCAPER ADVOCACY PROJECT
    4× · 2021–2024 · $150k · revenue +164%
  • BG
    BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF NORTH CENTRAL ILLINOIS INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $138k · revenue +50%

Funded once

  • SF
    SAFE FAMILIES FOR CHILDREN ALLIANCE
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +20%
  • LD
    Literacy DuPagegraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +181%
  • CF
    COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE FOX
    one grant, 2024 · $7k
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
Female Strong

Female strong is a 501c3 non-profit organization and a community of committed individuals that offer hands-on programs, mentorship, and experiences that build confidence in middle and high school girls. we support the inclusion of all…

Community Improvement
2
Casa of Dupage County Inc

Recruit, train, and support volunteer citizen advocates to effectively speak to the best interests of abused, neglected, and dependent children in dupage county's juvenile court system because every child has a right to a safe, permanent…

Civil Rights
3
Focus Fairies Mentoring

Focus Fairies Mentoring is a community-based nonprofit that empowers and uplifts Black girls and young women of color, ages 7 to 21, on Chicago's West and South sides who have experienced vicarious trauma, violence, and systemic inequities.

Youth Development
4
Greater Aurora Chamber of Commerce

To serve as a catalyst for business development in the Aurora region

—
5
Illinois Action for Children

Illinois Action for Children uplifts children and all who care for them, advancing strong families and prosperous communities.

—
6
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
7
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
8
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
9
Aurora Women's Empowerment Foundation
Philanthropy
10
Elevate Aurora Inc

To promote common business interests, growth, opportunity, and general economic welfare for businesses in Aurora, IL and the surrounding metropolitan area.

Community Improvement
11
Kids Above All Illinois

Helping chicagoland's at-risk children and their families build, achieve and sustain better lives.

—
12
Voluntary Action Center of Northern Illinois

Voluntary Action Center, which serves Bureau, Dekalb, Kendall, Lasalle and Putnam counties provides high quality services that address the basic transportation and nutrition needs of its communities.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Family Focus; the most unlike its peers is Fox Valley Music Foundation. 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

17 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. 17 of the 23 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
12/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF NORTH CENTRAL ILLINOIS INC: $137,500 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF NORTH CENTRAL ILLINOIS INCVNA Health Care: $109,000 · OtherVNA Health CareWOMEN'S BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $100,000 · OtherWOMEN'S BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTERIMPERFECT ANGELS ORGANIZATION: $77,950 · OtherIMPERFECT ANGELS ORGANIZATIONWEST AURORA A FOUNDATION: $59,850 · OtherWEST AURORA A FOUNDATION+5 more: $30,600 · Other+5 morePARAMOUNT ARTS CENTRE: $175,000 · Arts & CulturePARAMOUNT ARTS CENT…+1 more: $6,000 · Arts & CultureFARMWORKER AND LANDSCAPER ADVOCACY PROJECT: $150,000 · EmploymentFARMWORKER AND L…ALIVE CENTER NFP: $40,000 · Youth DevelopmentSIMPLY DESTINEE: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRL SCOUTS OF NORTHERN ILLINOIS: $7,025 · Youth DevelopmentA FOUNDATION FOR WEST AURORA SCHOOLS: $55,478 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE FOX RIVER VALLEY: $11,000 · PhilanthropyFamily Focus: $25,000 · Human ServicesDVSA COMMUNITIES: $15,000 · Human ServicesSAFE FAMILIES FOR CHILDREN ALLIANCE: $10,000 · Human ServicesLiteracy DuPage: $10,000 · EducationRush Copley Foundation: $6,750 · Health
Other$514,900Arts & Culture$181,000Employment$150,000Youth Development$72,025Philanthropy$66,478Human Services$50,000Education$10,000Health$6,750

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPARAMOUNT ARTS CENTRE: $175,000 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetFARMWORKER AND LANDSCAPER ADVOCACY PROJECT: $150,000 over 4y, 3.2% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF NORTH CENTRAL ILLINOIS INC: $137,500 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetVNA Health Care: $109,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWOMEN'S BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $100,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetIMPERFECT ANGELS ORGANIZATION: $77,950 over 2y, 70% of budgetA FOUNDATION FOR WEST AURORA SCHOOLS: $55,478 over 2y, 15% of budgetALIVE CENTER NFP: $40,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetFamily Focus: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSIMPLY DESTINEE: $25,000 over 2y, 9.6% of budgetDVSA COMMUNITIES: $15,000 over 2y, 7.7% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE FOX RIVER VALLEY: $11,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSAFE FAMILIES FOR CHILDREN ALLIANCE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLiteracy DuPage: $10,000 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF NORTHERN ILLINOIS: $7,025 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRush Copley Foundation: $6,750 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFOX VALLEY MUSIC FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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.

Community Foundation …Dunham FundDunham FoundationThe Bersted FoundationThe Chicago Community…United Way of Metropo…Fox Valley United WayThe Dupage Community …The Allstate Foundati…The Blackbaud Giving …Charities Aid Foundat…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…
Community Foundation of the Fox River ValleyIL24× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of the Fox River Valley · Dunham Fund · Dunham Foundation · The Bersted Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · Fox Valley United Way · The Dupage Community Foundation · The Allstate Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · Jpmorgan Chase 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 Aurora Women's Empowerment Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Aurora Women's Empowerment Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 Aurora Women's Empowerment Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Aurora Women's Empowerment 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 23 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 Aurora Women's Empowerment’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