· Public charity
Chicago Instructional Technology Foundation Inc
The corporation is organized and will be operated exclusively for "charitable, scientific and educational and "social welfare" purposes within the meaning of sections 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4), respectively of the internal revenue code.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 28 grants below total $1,232,410 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,616,410 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $384,000 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k13 grants · $359k
- $50k–250k15 grants · $873k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ACTION NOW | $86,660 |
| CENTER FOR MEDIA JUSTICE | $63,250 |
| BLACKROOTS ALLIANCE | $60,500 |
| CENTER FOR NULEADERSHIP ON URBAN SOLUTIONS | $60,500 |
| CHICAGO VOTES EDUCATION FUND | $60,500 |
| SPLINTER ART AND COMMUNITY FUND | $60,500 |
| SOUTHSIDERS ORGANIZED FOR UNITY AND LIBERATION | $60,500 |
| CHICAGO FREEDOM SCHOOL | $60,500 |
| EQUITY & TRANSFORMATION | $60,500 |
| URBAN GATEWAYS | $50,000 |
| BALLOT INITIATIVE STRATEGY CENTER (BISC) | $50,000 |
| KUUMBA LYNX | $50,000 |
| CHICAGO FILMMAKERS | $50,000 |
| FREE PRESSMEDIA 2070 | $50,000 |
| KENWOOD-OAKLAND COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION | $50,000 |
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 (FY22–24, $242k) 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 your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
44 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2024, 19 since wound down; 3 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, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $93k 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
- UWUNITED WORKING FAMILIES6× · 2019–2024 · $479k · revenue +29% · 27% of their budget
- IIILLINOIS IMMIGRANT ACTION INC8× · 2017–2024 · $349k · revenue +445% · 63% of their budget
- CFCenter For Racial and Gender E NFP7× · 2018–2024 · $303k · revenue +385% · 80% of their budget
Funded once
- WFWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $133k · revenue +42%
- PAPEOPLE'S ACTIONone grant, 2020 · $133k · revenue -56%
- CFCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND INCone grant, 2020 · $133k · revenue -78%
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.
Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.
Fund for Justice is a nationally connected social impact research and advocacy organization that works to achieve fundamental, systemic reform by addressing policies and practicies that prevent individuals from reaching their full…
Powerswitch action is a national network forging collective democracy and economies in our cities and states, together with our 21 grassroots affiliates.
The Network is a group of 40+ member organizations dedicated to improving the lives of those impacted by gender-based violence through education, public policy and advocacy, and connecting community members with direct service providers.…
A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…
Bold Impact is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting a democracy where all communities get to thrive.
To impact society through the powerful tools of media and film. we are a resource for uniting individuals interested in media and developing a core group of informed citizens.
Change illinois action fund is dedicated to advocating for solutions to the issues that undermine democracy and government efficiency in illinois, including restricted ballot access, uncompetitive elections, decreased citizen…
Change illinois is dedicated to activities that promote honest and effective government, open elections, and high levels of voter participation in illinois.
To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.
The mission of the Black Researchers Collective is to advance racial equity by training and equipping communities with research tools to be more civically engaged and policy informed.
Justice Action Center JAC pilots an innovative model that advances the rights of immigrant communities by connecting cutting-edge impact litigation and compelling narrative and communications content. The purpose of JAC is to advance the…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Illinois Humanities Council Inc and the most unlike its peers is Competition & Innovation Institute. 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 18 years old; the field is 20. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% 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.
83 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. 83 of the 87 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 Chicago Filmmakers ↗
- Who funds UNITED WORKING FAMILIES ↗
- Who funds SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS IMMIGRANT ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds Chicago Votes Action Fund ↗
- Who funds Center For Racial and Gender E NFP ↗
- Who funds THE PEOPLE'S LOBBY ↗
- Who funds Action Now ↗
- Who funds TIDES ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds ONE Peoples Campaign ↗
- Who funds The Center for Media Justice DBA MediaJustice ↗
- Who funds Grassroots Illinois Action ↗
- Who funds KARTEMQUIN EDUCATIONAL FILMS ↗
- Who funds ASIAN AMERICAN MIDWEST PROGRESSIVES ↗
- Who funds Jane Addams Seniors in Action ↗
- Who funds COLOROFCHANGEORG ↗
- Who funds CITY BUREAU NFP ↗
- Who funds URBAN GATEWAYS ↗
- Who funds NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BLACKROOTS ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds COMMON CAUSE ↗
- Who funds FREE PRESS ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds EQUITY AND TRANSFORMATION ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO FREEDOM SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Citizen Action Illinois ↗
- Who funds Engine Advocacy ↗
- Who funds WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE'S ACTION ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds KUUMBA LYNX ↗
- Who funds FIGHT FOR THE FUTURE INC ↗
- Who funds The Center For Nuleadership On Urban Solutions Inc ↗
- Who funds Splinter Art and Community Fund ↗
- Who funds FREE PRESS ↗
- Who funds SOUTHSIDERS ORGANIZED FOR UNITY AND LIBERATION ↗
- Who funds THE EXPERIMENTAL STATION ↗
- Who funds YOUNG INVINCIBLES ↗
- Who funds CROSSROADS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds TALKINGPOINTS ↗
- Who funds Kenwood Oakland Community Organization ↗
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: Instructional Telecommunications Foundation Inc · Twin Cities Schools' Telecommunications Group · Crossroads Fund Inc · Field Foundation of Illinois · Polk Bros Foundation Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Woods Fund of Chicago · Grand Victoria Foundation · Lloyd a Fry Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation 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 Chicago Instructional Technology 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.
- Chainless Change Inc — 0% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Chicago Instructional Technology Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Chicago Instructional Technology 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.