Skip to content
Dana Corman Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Dana Corman Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$66k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$25k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Human Services$220kEducation$97kRecreation & Sports$18kCivil Rights$5kHealth$4kFood & Nutrition$2kArts & Culture$2kAnimals$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $1k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $65k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$574k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES$25,000
LUTHERAN CHILD & FAMILY SERVICES$25,000
GREENLIGHT FAMILY SERVICES$15,000
CHICAGO PSYCHOANALYTIC INSTITUTE$1,000
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 (FY17–25, $160k) 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CENTER FOR HEALTH JUSTICE: $500 → 14%GREENLIGHT FAMILY SERVICES: $15k → 14%CENTER ON HALSTED: $56k → 14%CENTER ON HALSTED: $44k → 14%CENTER ON HALSTED: $25k → 14%CENTER ON HALSTED: $17k → 14%CENTER ON HALSTED: $730 → 14%LET IT BE US: $2k → 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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$283k · 8 repeat orgs$66k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
13

Total granted

$283k
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+208%

Still filing today

75%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 38% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $41k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEducationSocial ScienceRecreation & SportsFood & NutritionAnimalsOther
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

  • CO
    Center on Halsted
    5× · 2017–2023 · $143k · revenue +61%
  • LS
    LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF ILLINOIS
    2× · 2020–2025 · $33k · revenue +72%
  • MU
    Marquette University
    3× · 2017–2019 · $25k · revenue +46%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO - SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SERVICE ADMINISTRATION
    one grant, 2018 · $12k
  • BC
    BARR-HARRIS CHILDREN'S GRIEF CENTER
    one grant, 2020 · $3k
  • SC
    SHRINERS CHILDRENS HOSPITAL
    one grant, 2020 · $3k
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
The Chicago School of Professional Psychology

The Chicago School educates the next generation of change-makers in innovative theory and culturally competent practice to strengthen the integrated health of individuals, organizations, and communities.

Education
2
Loyola University of Chicago

We are chicago's jesuit, catholic university - a diverse community seeking god in all things and working to expand knowledge in the service of humanity through learning, justice, and faith.

Education
3
Illinois College

Illinois college is a co-educational institution of higher education learning providing a four-year educational program leading to the baccalaureate degree. illinois college is a community committed to the highest standards of scholarship…

Education
4
Chicago Children's Advocacy Center

The chicago children's advocacy center unites public, private, and community partners to ensure the safety, health, and well-being of abused children.

Crime & Legal
5
Center for Family Services

Administering an array of critical, intensive therapeutic interventions and/or facilitation services to emotionally and behaviorally disturbed clients for whom DCFS is legally responsible in order to stabilize their traditional or home of…

Human Services
6
Concordia University Chicago

Steadfast in jesus christ as revealed in the holy scriptures, concordia university chicago promotes academic rigor in its liberal arts and professional programs; grounds students in objective truth, integrity, and excellence; and practices…

Education
7
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…

—
8
Chicago Heightening Opportunity and Potential for

Providing academic support to children experiencing homelessness in Chicago and providing resources and services to families experiencing homelessness in Chicago.

Education
9
Latino Union of Chicago

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.

Human Services
10
Saint Xavier University

Saint xavier university, a catholic institution inspired by the heritage of the sisters of mercy, educates persons to search for truth, think critically, communicate effectively and serve wisely and compassionately in support of human…

Education
11
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
12
Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago

Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago's purpose is to partner with mission-driven people and organizations across Cook and Lake counties and to witness a message of mercy and hope to a world in need through service.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lutheran Social Services of Illinois; the most unlike its peers is Marquette University. 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 24 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)
14/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Center on Halsted: $142,930 · Human ServicesCenter on HalstedGREENLIGHT FAMILY SERVICES: $15,000 · Human ServicesGREENLIGHT FAMILY SERVICES+2 more: $2,500 · Human ServicesIL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $42,500 · OtherIL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF ILLINOIS: $32,500 · OtherLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF ILLINOISLUTHERAN CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES OF ILLINOIS: $25,000 · OtherLUTHERAN CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES OF IL…UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO - SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SERVICE ADMINISTRATION: $12,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO - SCHOOL OF SOCIAL…I AM WHO I AM: $4,785 · Other+8 more: $9,500 · Other+8 moreMarquette University: $25,000 · EducationMarquette Uni…TRINITY COLLEGE: $17,000 · EducationTRINITY COLLE…Northwestern University: $17,500 · Recreation & SportsCHICAGO PSYCHOANALYTIC INSTITUTE: $1,000 · Social SciencePAWS INC: $1,000 · AnimalsBEYOND HUNGER: $650 · Food & NutritionHOUSING FORWARD: $500 · Housing & Shelter
Human Services$160,430Other$126,285Education$42,000Recreation & Sports$17,500Social Science$1,000Animals$1,000Food & Nutrition$650Housing & Shelter$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 budgetCenter on Halsted: $142,930 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF ILLINOIS: $32,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMarquette University: $25,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetLUTHERAN CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES OF ILLINOIS: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNorthwestern University: $17,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTRINITY COLLEGE: $17,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGREENLIGHT FAMILY SERVICES: $15,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetLET IT BE US: $2,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetCHICAGO PSYCHOANALYTIC INSTITUTE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAWS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetThe Saints of Chicago: $1,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetBEYOND HUNGER: $650 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOUSING FORWARD: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHICAGO ABORTION FUND: $500 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

AbbVie FoundationThe Christopher Famil…The Chicago Community…John D and Catherine …Arthur J Gallagher Fo…The Blackbaud Giving …Charities Aid Foundat…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…
AbbVie FoundationIL15.3× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: AbbVie Foundation · The Christopher Family Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Arthur J Gallagher Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 Dana Corman Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Dana Corman Foundation. 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%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Trinity College: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
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 24 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-PF 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 Dana Corman’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