· Private foundation
Casten Family Foundation Inc
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k5 grants · $9k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $51k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $153k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LEAP SCIENCE AND MATHS SCHOOL | $153,212 |
| FULBRIGHT COMMISSION | $38,498 |
| Individual grant recipient | $12,612 |
| HINSDALE HIGH SCHOOL LEAP CLUB | $6,737 |
| MORTON ARBORETUM | $880 |
| SCLERODERMA FOUNDATION OF GREATER CHICAGO | $740 |
| WTTW | $400 |
| WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC | $100 |
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 US giving — 54% of grant dollars ($1.3M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 46% that went abroad ($1.1M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY17–21, $63k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 44% 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
Beyond the US — 46% of all-years giving ($1.1M)
2 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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 +43% since the first grant, against +21% for the ones you funded once.
34 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 28 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $39k 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
- OAONE ACRE FUND7× · 2017–2023 · $407k · revenue +153%
- CPCHICAGO PUBLIC MEDIA INC5× · 2017–2022 · $207k · revenue +38%
- HSHACKLEY SCHOOL2× · 2017–2018 · $80k · revenue +43%
Funded once
- ISITALY SLOW FOODS FULBRIGHT PROGRAMone grant, 2017 · $54k
- UDUNIVERSITA DI SCIENZE GASTONOMIone grant, 2018 · $39k
- TLThe Land Institutegraduatedone grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue +105%
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.
See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
Chicago sun-times serves the public interest by strengthening the well-being of our local communities and our democracy through independent local journalism.
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
The greater chicago food depository is the nonprofit food bank serving cook county. our mission - is to end hunger. we believe food is a basic human right. to achieve our mission, we work in partnership with a network of community-based…
Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.
Ceres is a nonprofit advocacy organization working to accelerate the transition to a cleaner, more just, and resilient world. through education and research, we make the business case for action on the most pressing sustainability…
To nourish the world's hungry through uniting and advancing food banks.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Toniic Institute and the most unlike its peers is Organization for the Advancement of Afghan Women. 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 39 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
47 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 47 of the 88 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 ONE ACRE FUND ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO PUBLIC MEDIA INC ↗
- Who funds HACKLEY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds The Land Institute ↗
- Who funds Metropolitan Family Services ↗
- Who funds THE COMMUNITY HOUSE ↗
- Who funds THE CHICAGO COUNCIL ON GLOBAL AFFAIRS ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CERGE-EI FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Family Shelter Service Inc ↗
- Who funds GlobeMed NFP ↗
- Who funds PLEASANT HOME FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF CHICAGOLAND WEST ↗
- Who funds HCS FAMILY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds THE BOULEVARD OF CHICAGO INC ↗
- Who funds THE MORTON ARBORETUM ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR INQUIRY INC ↗
- Who funds ORGANIZATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF AFGHAN WOMEN ↗
- Who funds Vermont Public Radio ↗
- Who funds Chicago Symphony Orchestra ↗
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: The Dupage Community Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Ge Aerospace Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Verizon Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Casten Family Foundation Inc 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.
- Mad River Path Association — 2% of income from government
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.