· Private foundation
Burns Legacy Foundation co John Neal
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.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 61% of Burns Legacy Foundation co John Neal’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k6 grants · $24k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $141k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RCOSA | $20,000 |
| Mike Rowe Works Foundation | $15,000 |
| Alexian Brothers Scholarship Fund | $15,000 |
| Waukegan to College | $15,000 |
| Misericordia | $14,000 |
| Literacy Volunteers Fox Valley | $12,000 |
| Sharing Center | $10,000 |
| Alexian Brothers Behavioral Health | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| Camp Courageous | $10,000 |
| Imerman Angels | $10,000 |
| Brooklyn Public Library | $7,000 |
| Doctors of Recital Partners | $5,000 |
| Kenosha Welcome Center | $5,000 |
| CASA of the River Region | $2,500 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $132k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 54% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +32% since the first grant, against +17% for the ones you funded once.
29 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- WTWaukegan To College NFP9× · 2017–2025 · $103k · revenue +162%
- IAIMERMAN ANGELS7× · 2018–2025 · $80k · revenue +72%
- MFMIKEROWEWORKS FOUNDATION6× · 2017–2025 · $75k · revenue +228%
Funded once
- HAHoly Angels Catholic Schoolone grant, 2024 · $51k
- BBBetter Business Bureau Education Foone grant, 2018 · $20k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $15k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Nourishing hope provides food, mental health support, and social services to help all our neighbors thrive.
Eliminating barriers to employment by providing pathways for those who are underserved, underrepresented and disadvantaged who have a goal of building skills that lead to sustained employment and improved financial stability.
Rock river valley blood center, in partnership with our community, is dedicated to providing safe, high value blood products and services to people in need.
To define and advance quality, effective, equitable, and accessible cancer care and prevention so all people can live better lives.
The mission of goodwill is to create opportunities for individuals with barriers to enhance their lives. barriers include physical or mental disabilities, lack of education and job preparation, socio-economic disadvantages, and others.…
Providing innovative and life-enriching services for children, adolescents, and adults with disabilities.
To serve our communities by provding innovative and compassionate healthcare.
Engaging the community to end hunger
Volunteers of america of illinois partners with the people we serve to create transformational and lasting change in their lives through programs that support, empower, and transform.
We inspire people to experience life at its fullest by encouraging ownership of health, fostering independence, and serving the whole person; and do so with an unwavering commitment as stewards of medicaid funding.
Unite blood and biologics donors, talent, and innovation to save and improve lives.
Midwest dairy works with others to give consumers an excellent dairy experience increasing sales, fostering innovation, and inspiring consumer confidence of dairy products and practices.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Wisconsin Inc and the most unlike its peers is Brooklyn Public Library. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 26 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
24 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 24 of the 53 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds Waukegan To College NFP ↗
- Who funds IMERMAN ANGELS ↗
- Who funds MIKEROWEWORKS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CLEARBROOK ↗
- Who funds ALEXIAN BROTHERS HEALTH SYSTEM ↗
- Who funds LITERACY VOLUNTEERS FOX VALLEY ↗
- Who funds TEAM RUBICON INC ↗
- Who funds SHARING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE FOLDS OF HONOR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF WISCONSIN INC ↗
- Who funds CAMP COURAGEOUS OF IOWA ↗
- Who funds Alexian Brothers Behavioral Health Hospital ↗
- Who funds HOPE FOR THE DAY ↗
- Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF ILLINOIS INC ↗
- Who funds BROOKLYN PUBLIC LIBRARY ↗
- Who funds Kenosha Welcome Center Inc ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: AbbVie Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Burns Legacy Foundation co John Neal funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.