Skip to content
Chicago Chapter Charities Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Chicago Chapter Charities Foundation Inc

Impact lives african americans

$122k
Granted FY2020
9
Grants FY2020
3
States reached
$30k
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, FY2018 to 2020.

Youth Development$66kHuman Services$43kArts & Culture$40kHealth$30kCommunity Improvement$21kCrime & Legal$15kHousing & Shelter$15kReligion$3k
02FY2020 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $116,549, the rows itemized in this filing. The $121,549 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $5,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2020

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $107k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$163k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE LINKS FDN$30,000
CHAPTER LINKS$26,549
FAMILY RESCUE$10,000
THRESHOLD CHGO$10,000
DEP AND BIPOLAR$10,000
TRILOGY BEHAVIOR$10,000
THE NIGHT MIN$10,000
MERCY HOME$7,500
ALSAS ST JUDE$2,500
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 (FY18–20, $33k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%YWCA: $13k → 14%THE NIGHT MIN: $10k → 14%FAMILY RESCUE: $10k → 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.

35%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$81k · 3 repeat orgs$151k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +422% since the first grant, against +77% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2020, 1 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
8

Total granted

$81k
$69k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+422%
+77%

Still filing today

67%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 29% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $83k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20
Human ServicesYouth DevelopmentCrime & LegalCommunity ImprovementEducationHealthOther
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

  • C(
    Chicago (IL) Chapter of The Links Incorporated
    3× · 2018–2020 · $56k · revenue +422%
  • MO
    MISSION OF OUR LADY OF MERCY
    2× · 2018–2020 · $15k
  • RP
    Resilience Partners NFP
    2× · 2018–2019 · $10k · revenue +38%

Funded once

  • YM
    YWCA METROPOLITAN CHICAGOgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $13k · revenue +127%
  • BU
    BREAKTHROUGH URBAN MINISTRIES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $11k · revenue +139%
  • FC
    FIREBIRD COMMUNITY ARTSgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +357%
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
Association House of Chicago

Association house's mission is to advance each person's full participation in the life of their families, communities, and society. since 1899, we have served a vibrant, multicultural community. we used a trauma informed, culturally…

Human Services
2
Chicago House & Social Service Agency

Provides housing and support services to individuals and families impacted by hiv/aids

Health
3
Youth and Family Alliance

Youth and family alliance (dba lifeworks) is a fearless advocate for youth and young adults pursuing a life they love and a stable future for themselves and their families. we strive to break cycles of instability by providing support and…

Human Services
4
Bright Star Community Outreach Corp

Our mission is to empower residents to share in the responsibility ofbuilding community through pooling resources and forming partnerships.we will accomplish our mission by developing innovative performancebased projects and programs to…

Youth Development
5
Preferred Behavioral Health of Nj Inc

To deliver quality and compassionate behavioral health services to individuals and families all the time through a trauma informed care philosophy and approach.

Health
6
Boys and Girls Village Inc

Boys and girls village serves children and families in at-risk situations by strengthening their ability to succeed in life.

Human Services
7
Lake County Crisis Center

A safe place is the leading advocate for eliminating domestic violence & human trafficking in northern illinois.

—
8
Child Link Inc

Child Link provides foster care, family counseling, and therapy services to Chicago area adolescents who are at risk of homelessness. Child Link also refers adolescents to other agencies that are able to provide additional resources and…

Human Services
9
Northside Center for Child Development Inc

To foster the healthy development of children and families and seek to empower them to respond constructively to negative societal factors including racism and its related consequences. through comprehensive, high quality mental health and…

Education
10
Alternatives Inc

Alternatives, inc.'s mission is to facilitate personal development,strengthen family relationships and enhance the community's well being. serving over 3,000 youth and families annually, the organization offers a range of counseling and…

Health
11
Presence Behavioral Health

Rooted in the loving ministry of jesus as healer, we commit ourselves to serving all persons with special attention to those who are poor and vulnerable. our catholic health ministry is dedicated to spiritually-centered, holistic care…

Health
12
The District of Columbia Children's Advocacy Center

Safe shores provides survivor-centered intervention, hope and healing for children and families affected by abuse, trauma and violence in the district of columbia, and works to prevent and end child abuse and neglect through promising…

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Family Rescue Inc; the most unlike its peers is Westside Association for Community Action. 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

15 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. 15 of the 18 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Chicago (IL) Chapter of The Links Incorporated: $56,200 · OtherChicago (IL) Chapter of The Links IncorporatedTHE LINKS FOUNDATION INCORPORATED: $30,000 · OtherTHE LINKS FOUNDATION INCORPORATEDMISSION OF OUR LADY OF MERCY: $15,000 · OtherMISSION OF OUR LADY OF MERCYBREAKTHROUGH URBAN MINISTRIES INC: $11,000 · OtherBREAKTHROUGH URBAN MINISTRIES INCFIREBIRD COMMUNITY ARTS: $10,000 · OtherFIREBIRD COMMUNITY ARTSTRILOGY INC: $10,000 · OtherTRILOGY INCTHE THRESHOLDS: $10,000 · OtherTHE THRESHOLDS+3 more: $12,500 · Other+3 moreYWCA METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $12,500 · Human ServicesYWCA METROPOLIT…FAMILY RESCUE INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesFAMILY RESCUE I…THE NIGHT MINISTRY: $10,000 · Human ServicesTHE NIGHT MINIS…BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF CHICAGO: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentCHICAGO CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER: $10,000 · Crime & LegalDEPRESSION AND BIPOLAR SUPPORT ALLIANCE: $10,000 · HealthResilience Partners NFP: $10,000 · Community ImprovementWestside Association for Community Action: $5,000 · Education
Other$154,700Human Services$32,500Youth Development$10,000Crime & Legal$10,000Health$10,000Community Improvement$10,000Education$5,000

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 budgetChicago (IL) Chapter of The Links Incorporated: $56,200 over 3y, 16% of budgetTHE LINKS FOUNDATION INCORPORATED: $30,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetYWCA METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $12,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH URBAN MINISTRIES INC: $11,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFIREBIRD COMMUNITY ARTS: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetTRILOGY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF CHICAGO: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHICAGO CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE NIGHT MINISTRY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE THRESHOLDS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDEPRESSION AND BIPOLAR SUPPORT ALLIANCE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetEARTHHEART FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 18% 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.

United Way of Metropo…John D and Catherine …The Chicago Community…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
United Way of Metropolitan Chicago IncIL13.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · 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 Chicago Chapter Charities Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chicago Chapter Charities Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 Chicago Chapter Charities Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Chicago Chapter Charities Foundation Inc 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 18 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $30k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2020, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Chicago Chapter Charities’ 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