· Private foundation
Domont Family Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k24 grants · $74k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $80k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| JEWISH UNITED FUND | $15,000 |
| TEMPLE SHALOM | $13,800 |
| Individual grant recipient | $11,315 |
| EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE | $10,000 |
| GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY | $10,000 |
| COMMUNITY FUND OF DARIEN | $10,000 |
| MARCH FOURTH COALITION | $10,000 |
| PERSON TO PERSON INC | $7,500 |
| UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA | $7,500 |
| MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION | $7,000 |
| AFTERMATH | $6,000 |
| RAVINIA FESTIVAL | $5,000 |
| REPAIRERS OF THE BREACH | $5,000 |
| CAMP FOR ALL KIDS | $4,000 |
| OLD IRVING PARK COMM CLINIC | $4,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $48k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 99% 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.
47 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2025, 26 since wound down; 8 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, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k 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
- JUJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO9× · 2017–2025 · $173k · revenue +13%
RAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION9× · 2017–2025 · $39k · revenue +54%- SPSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC8× · 2017–2024 · $32k · revenue +10%
Funded once
- SCSUMMER CAMP OPPORTUNITIES PROMOTE EDUCATION INCone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue -2%
- ALANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUEone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue -17%
- HIHELPHOPELIVE INCgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $2k · revenue +35%
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.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
The mission of the university of chicago has been to sustain at the highest level of excellence, the communication of knowledge, the creation of knowledge and the fostering of a dynamic community of scholars and students.
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
The organization's mission is to educate students for creative occupations in diverse fields of arts and media.
Fordham university, the jesuit university of new york, is committed to the discovery of wisdom and the transmission of learning, through research and through education of the highest quality. for more information, see schedule o.
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…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
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.
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
Depauw university develops leaders the world needs through an uncommon commitment to the liberal arts. depauw's diverse and inclusive learning and living experience, distinctive in its rigorous intellectual engagement and its global and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sga Youth & Family Services Nfp and the most unlike its peers is Aftermath March Fourth Coalition. 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 48 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
46 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. 46 of the 70 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 JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds RAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN SECURITY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Aftermath March Fourth Coalition ↗
- Who funds PERSON TO PERSON INC ↗
- Who funds Writers Theatre Inc ↗
- Who funds 350ORG ↗
- Who funds The Trustees of Princeton University ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Repairers of the Breach ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE COMMUNITY FUND OF DARIEN ↗
- Who funds THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds DOMUS KIDS INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH SHORE SENIOR CENTER ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Indiana University Foundation ↗
- Who funds Share our Spare ↗
- Who funds THE OPEN DOOR SHELTER INC ↗
- Who funds Northwestern University ↗
- Who funds ADVOCATE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SUMMER CAMP OPPORTUNITIES PROMOTE EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds Kipp Metro Atlanta Collaborative Inc ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS INC ↗
- Who funds REPAIRERS OF THE BREACH INC ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
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: Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · The Chicago Community Trust · Bednyak Family Foundation · Fairfield County's Community Foundation Inc · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · The Yelp Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Synchrony Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation
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 Domont Family 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- The Open Door Shelter Inc — 14% of income from government
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% of income from government
- The Community Fund of Darien — 9% of income from government
- Domus Kids Inc — 7% of income from government
- Person to Person Inc — 5% of income from government
- Sandy Hook Promise Foundation — 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.