· Public charity
City Colleges of Chicago Foundation
Fueled by the generosity of Chicago's philanthropic community, the City Colleges of Chicago Foundation raises charitable contributions to support community colleges students from all backgrounds in reaching their academic and career goals.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 3 grants below total $6,112,254 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $8,019,233 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,906,979 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 · FY2025
- $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
- $250k+2 grants · $6.1M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| City Colleges of Chicago | $5,842,717 |
| Children First Fund The Chicago Public Schools Foundation | $250,000 |
| Alivio Medical Center Inc | $19,537 |
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 (FY22–22, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 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.
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.
8 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
- NANational Association of Women Business Owners - Chicago Chapter4× · 2020–2024 · $70k · revenue +16%
- UWUNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INC2× · 2023–2024 · $56k · revenue +0%
- MAMEXICAN AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERC4× · 2020–2023 · $45k · revenue +206%
Funded once
- ACALL CHICAGO MAKING HOMELESSNESS HISTORYgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $388k · revenue +123%
- OMONE MILLION DEGREESgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $110k · revenue +90%
- TUTemple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Educationone grant, 2024 · $27k · revenue +11%
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.
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.
In furtherance of its charitable and educational goals, the Network's activities consist primarily of providing educational opportunities for its members and the public on issues related to the advancement of women in the workplace. As the…
Latino Union works to defend the rights and dignity of contingent workers, including the right to immigrate, work, live free of oppression and violence, and provide for oneself and one's family.
Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.
Chicago Workers' Collaborative's mission is to promote full employment and equality for the lowest wage-earners, primarily temporary staffing workers, in the Chicago region through leadership and skills training, critical assistance and…
Chicago Jobs Council (CJC) pursues its mission through advocacy, applied research, public education and capacity-building initiatives focused on influencing the development or reform of public policies and programs. From 18 original…
The Partnership for College Completion (PCC) champions policies, practices, and systems that increase college completion and eliminate degree completion disparities for low-income, first generation, and students of color in Illinois…
A better chicago is changing how chicago fights poverty by investing in bold ideas that create opportunity for our youth.
The chicago committee seeks racial and ethnic diversity in the legal profession by collaborating with its law firm and corporate membership to: drive sustainable institutional change at law firms and corporate legal departments; provide…
Community Desk Chicago ("the Desk") is an Illinois 501 (C)(3) nonprofit whose mission is to advance equitable economic prosperity in collaboration with historically under-resourced communities. The Organization serves as a help desk and…
Chicago Women in Philanthropy (CWIP) promotes collaboration between philanthropic and nonprofit leaders by offering opportunities to share ideas and insight and to network. CWIP gives voice to the gender lens by encouraging philanthropic…
To realize a more equitable and inclusive economy by advancing innovative workforce solutions that equip local residents with the skills and resources to access high-growth employment opportunities in tech and other rapidly growing fields…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc and the most unlike its peers is Women in Listed Derivatives Nfp. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 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. 19 of the 20 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 CHILDREN FIRST FUND THE CHICAGO PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALL CHICAGO MAKING HOMELESSNESS HISTORY ↗
- Who funds ONE MILLION DEGREES ↗
- Who funds National Association of Women Business Owners - Chicago Chapter ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INC ↗
- Who funds MEXICAN AMERICAN CHAMBER OF COMMERC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO MINORITY SUPPLIER DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds Temple University - Of The Commonwealth System of Higher Education ↗
- Who funds LIFT INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY ORGANIZING AND FAMILY ISSUES ↗
- Who funds Enlace Chicago ↗
- Who funds Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce ↗
- Who funds ALIVIO MEDICAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Working Credit NFP ↗
- Who funds WOMEN IN LISTED DERIVATIVES NFP ↗
- Who funds The Cara Program ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds DEPAUL USA INC ↗
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: Chicago Foundation for Women · Polk Bros Foundation Inc · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Circle of Service Foundation · Michael Reese Health Trust · Fifth Third Chicagoland Foundation · Unidosus · Robert R McCormick Foundation · United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund
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 City Colleges of Chicago Foundation 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.
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.