Skip to content
Chicago Learning Exchange at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Chicago Learning Exchange

The Chicago Learning Exchange (CLX) is a nonprofit organization that connects and supports our city's array of out-of-school time youth-focused organizations in order to prepare youth, youth workers, and our city for the future.

$34k
Granted FY2023
1
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
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 2023.

Arts & Culture$146kEducation$35kCommunity Improvement$25kPublic Benefit$20kYouth Development$15kEmployment$12k
02FY2023 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $15,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $33,500 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $18,500 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.
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$349k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Project Exploration$15,000
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 (FY18–19, $27k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ChickTech: $15k → 12%Hyde Park Neighborhood Club: $12k → 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 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
The Chicago High School for the Arts

The chicago high school for the arts (chiarts) develops the next generation of diverse, artistically promising scholar-artists through intensive pre-professional training in the arts, combined with a comprehensive college preparatory…

Education
2
Students Run Chicago
Health
3
Chicago Center for Arts and Technology Inc

At chicat, we educate and inspire youth through no-cost arts and technology programs. we empower adults through no-cost job training programs that help them find sustainable employment. we elevate the talents of the community through…

Employment
4
Chicago Council on Science & Technology

The Chicago Council on Science and Technology's (C2ST) mission is to inspire and engage all segments of society about science and technology and their contributions to society.

Science & Tech
5
Chicago Votes

Chicago Votes is a non-partisan, non-profit organization building a more inclusive democracy by putting power in the hands of young Chicagoans. We're engaging and developing a new generation of leaders by opening the doors of government,…

Civil Rights
6
Chicago City Theatre Company dba Joel Hall Dancers & Center

To enrich the lives of our community through dance education and performance while developing Chicago's native talent pool in a welcoming environment that celebrates multiculturalism & ethnic diversity.

Arts & Culture
7
Chicago Children's Museum

Chicago childrens museum is a place where families and caregivers with infants and children are encouraged to create, explore, and discover together through play. the museum features three vibrant floors of exhibits and activities that…

Arts & Culture
8
Chicago Center for Urban Life and Culture

The chicago center for urban life and culture equips college students and other participants to learn from diverse urban communities through innovative programs, seminars, and internships. the chicago center expands the traditional…

Education
9
Chicago Youth Programs Inc

Tutoring and mentoring programs for inner city youth.

—
10
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
11
Chicago United

To achieve parity in economic opportunity for people of color by advancing multiracial leadership in corporate governance, expanding the talent pipline for executive-level management, and growing minority businesses.

Philanthropy
12
Chicago United for Equity

Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mikva Challenge Grant Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Project Exploration. 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

10 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. 10 of the 12 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMUNITY TELEVISION NETWORK INC: $70,000 · Arts & CultureCOMMUNITY TELEVISION NETWORK INCNATIONAL MUSEUM OF MEXICAN ART FKA MEXICAN FINE ARTS CENTER MUSEUM: $46,490 · Arts & CultureNATIONAL MUSEUM OF MEXICAN ART FKA MEXICAN FINE ARTS CENTER MUSEUMURBAN GATEWAYS: $20,000 · Arts & CultureURBAN GATEWAYSPROJECT EXPLORATION: $15,000 · Arts & CulturePROJECT EXPLORATIONNERDY MEDIA1: $15,000 · OtherNERDY MEDIA1Chicago Architecture Foundation: $12,500 · OtherChicago Archite…Latin Center: $7,500 · OtherLatin CenterColumbia College Chicago: $15,000 · EducationColumbia Col…MIKVA CHALLENGE GRANT FOUNDATION: $12,500 · EducationMIKVA CHALLE…ChickTech: $15,000 · Human ServicesChickTechHYDE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD CLUB: $12,300 · Human ServicesHYDE PARK NE…Resilience Partners NFP: $12,500 · Community Improvement
Arts & Culture$151,490Other$35,000Education$27,500Human Services$27,300Community Improvement$12,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMMUNITY TELEVISION NETWORK INC: $70,000 over 4y, 7.8% of budgetNATIONAL MUSEUM OF MEXICAN ART FKA MEXICAN FINE ARTS CENTER MUSEUM: $46,490 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetURBAN GATEWAYS: $20,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetPROJECT EXPLORATION: $15,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetColumbia College Chicago: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChickTech: $15,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetMIKVA CHALLENGE GRANT FOUNDATION: $12,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHYDE PARK NEIGHBORHOOD CLUB: $12,300 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetLatin Center: $7,500 over 1y, 0.7% 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.

The Chicago Community…United Way of Metropo…John D and Catherine …Jpmorgan Chase Founda…American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Chicago Community TrustIL19.3× affinity8 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Learning Exchange funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chicago Learning Exchange. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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.

    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 12 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 2023, released 2023. 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 $15k 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 FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Chicago Learning Exchange’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