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

· Public charity

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.

$88k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its 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 2024.

Youth Development$64kPublic Benefit$40kCommunity Improvement$18kArts & Culture$18kCivil Rights$16kSocial Science$6k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $61,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $87,871 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $26,871 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 · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $11k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$950k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
World Organizing Institute$50,000
MUD Theatre Project$11,000
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 (FY24–24, $10k) 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%Healthy Hood: $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.

52%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$115k · 7 repeat orgs$109k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
6

Total granted

$115k
$48k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+97%
+100%

Still filing today

86%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $61k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’21’22’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’21’22’24’25
Arts & CultureCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitHuman ServicesSocial ScienceOther
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

  • LS
    Logan Square Neighborhood Association
    3× · 2018–2021 · $26k · revenue +214%
  • TP
    THE PEOPLE'S LOBBY EDUCATION INSTITUTE
    2× · 2018–2019 · $18k · revenue +97%
  • IP
    ILLINOIS PIRG EDUCATION FUND INC
    2× · 2018–2021 · $12k · revenue +79%

Funded once

  • ST
    Southside Together Organizing For Powergraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +169%
  • HH
    HEALTHY HOOD CHICAGO
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +2%
  • YI
    Young Invincibles
    one grant, 2021 · $8k
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
Chicago United for Equity

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

Civil Rights
2
Students Run Chicago
Health
3
Asian Law Caucus

The Asian Law Caucus's mission is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities, recognizing that social, economic, political and racial inequalities continue to exist…

Crime & Legal
4
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
5
Invisible Institute

Enhancing the capacity of citizens to hold public institutions accountable through the practice of investigative journalism. The Organization adheres to the central principle that citizens have co-responsibility with the government for…

Civil Rights
6
Latino Political Network
—
7
Asian American Advocacy Alliance
Community Improvement
8
Blocks Together

Blocks Together: Blocks Together (BT) is a membership-based community organizing group in the West Humboldt Park neighborhood on Chicago's West Side. Since 1995, BT has empowered residents to work together for systematic changes that bring…

—
9
Alianza Leadership Institute

The Alliance of the SouthEast (ASE) builds the capacity of leaders, organizers, and associations that carry out community and social change. We envision a powerful grassroots base that impacts decision makers and wins real improvements in…

Human Services
10
United Way of Illinois

Strengthen United Way movement in Illinois

Philanthropy
11
Illinois Coalition for Jobs Growth and Prosperity

To promote job growth and communicate important issues to the public through information campaigns.

Community Improvement
12
Live Free Chicago

Live Free Illinois is a statewide organization partnering with over 120 congregations and directly impacted individuals to build safer more equitable communities across Illinois. Operating at the intersection of criminal justice reform and…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights; the most unlike its peers is Mud Theatre Project. 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

12 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. 12 of the 15 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
7/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

World Organizing Institute: $50,000 · Arts & CultureWorld Organizing InstituteURBAN GATEWAYS: $17,653 · Arts & CultureURBAN GATEWAYSMUD THEATRE PROJECT: $11,000 · Arts & CultureMUD THEATRE PROJECTLogan Square Neighborhood Association: $26,072 · Community ImprovementLogan Square Neigh…Southside Together Organizing For Power: $10,000 · Community ImprovementSouthside Together…Street-Level Youth Media: $17,679 · OtherStreet-Level Yout…Young Invincibles: $8,393 · OtherYoung InvinciblesIndividual grant recipient: $7,678 · OtherIndividual grant …THE PEOPLE'S LOBBY EDUCATION INSTITUTE: $17,679 · Public BenefitTHE PEOPLE'S LO…ILLINOIS PIRG EDUCATION FUND INC: $12,143 · Public BenefitILLINOIS PIRG E…YOUNG INVINCIBLES: $12,679 · Civil RightsYOUNG INVINCIB…ILLINOIS COALITION FOR IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS: $11,429 · Civil RightsILLINOIS COALI…ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE - AAJC INC: $5,000 · Civil RightsASIAN AMERICAN…HEALTHY HOOD CHICAGO: $10,000 · Human ServicesASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE - CHICAGO: $6,429 · Social Science
Arts & Culture$78,653Community Improvement$36,072Other$33,750Public Benefit$29,822Civil Rights$29,108Human Services$10,000Social Science$6,429

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLogan Square Neighborhood Association: $26,072 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetTHE PEOPLE'S LOBBY EDUCATION INSTITUTE: $17,679 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetURBAN GATEWAYS: $17,653 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetYOUNG INVINCIBLES: $12,679 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetILLINOIS PIRG EDUCATION FUND INC: $12,143 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetILLINOIS COALITION FOR IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS: $11,429 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMUD THEATRE PROJECT: $11,000 over 1y, 9.1% of budgetSouthside Together Organizing For Power: $10,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetHEALTHY HOOD CHICAGO: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE - AAJC INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Grand Victoria Founda…The Joyce FoundationThe Chicago Community…Woods Fund of ChicagoJulian Grace Foundati…Field Foundation of I…Circle of Service Fou…New Venture FundWieboldt FoundationThe Albert Pick Jr Fu…Alphawood FoundationForefront
Grand Victoria FoundationIL19.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Grand Victoria Foundation · The Joyce Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Woods Fund of Chicago · Julian Grace Foundation · Field Foundation of Illinois · Circle of Service Foundation · New Venture Fund · Wieboldt Foundation · The Albert Pick Jr Fund · Alphawood Foundation · Forefront

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 Votes funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chicago Votes. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 15 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Chicago Votes’ 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