How much did EDMOND AND ALICE OPLER FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 91% of EDMOND AND ALICE OPLER FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

civic social

2019

—

2020

—

2021

—

2022

—

2023

—

2024

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$1,004,925

Median grant

States reached

$21M

Total assets

Largest grants

SEE STATEMENT ATTACHED$1,004,925

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–18, $254k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 10%. 91% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$7.6M · 47 repeat orgs$334k to everyone else

47 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 46 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$7.6M

$334k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%

+35%

Still filing today

64%

43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesHealthHousing & ShelterAnimalsEmploymentArts & CultureOther

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

WH
WELLNESS HOUSE
2× · 2017–2018 · $60k · revenue +29%
GS
GOOD SHEPHERD MANOR
2× · 2017–2018 · $60k · revenue +56%
CW
CANCER WELLNESS CENTER
2× · 2017–2018 · $40k · revenue +30%

Funded once

TT
THE THRESHOLDS
one grant, 2017 · $30k · revenue +18%
TB
THE BUNKER INCUBATOR NFP
one grant, 2018 · $20k
LS
LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR ST MARY'S HOME
one grant, 2017 · $20k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Cunningham Childrens Home of Urbana Il

Provide therapeutic services to youth in educational, community, & residential care settings.

Human Services

Lincoln Behavioral Services

Lincoln Behavioral Services provides comprehensive outpatient mental health and physical health services to individuals residing in southeastern Michigan.

Health

Lutheran Social Services of

Stabilize lives during crisis and transition, build a foundation where people can thrive, and preserve dignity and respect for the most vulnerable.

Religion

Cascadia Health

Cascadia health delivers whole health care - integrated mental health and addiction services, primary care, and housing - to support our communities and provide hope and well-being for those we serve.

Health

Cornerstone Services Inc

The organization seeks to provide residential services for disabled adults and children, as well as behavioral health, regular work and supported employment services for these disabled individuals. additionally, developmental training and…

Human Services

Christian Care Retirement Apartments

Providing quality middle-market residential living for seniors.

—

Care Partners of Cook County

Care Partners of Cook County provides support and companionship on the journey of aging and serious illness

Human Services

Lakeside Curative Services Inc

Lakeside curative services believes that "potential is limitless." this value is carried through by providing community based employment and other training experiences that will support individuals with disabilities to be a part of their…

Health

Chicago Lighthouse Industries

Chicago lighthouse industries provides rehabilitation, training and employment (see schedule o) for individuals with blindness and/or visual impairment, through its manufacturing programs and government contracts.

Human Services

National Church Residences At Home

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors.

—

National Church Residences At Home

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors.

—

Living Well Disability Services

Transforms lives of people impacted by disabilities through delivery of exceptional services

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Little City Foundation and the most unlike its peers is The Thresholds. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 43 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/45

the rest of the field

14%

4,320/31,465

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.

05the grantee network

44 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

42/44

Grantees still filing

30/44

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$7,263,990Human Services$253,779Health$185,500Animals$75,000Housing & Shelter$69,000International$55,000Environment$35,000

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.

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.

George M Eisenberg FoundationIL31× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: George M Eisenberg Foundation · The Coleman Foundation Inc · United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · AbbVie Foundation · Circle of Service Foundation · Dr Scholl Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Rice Foundation · Blowitz-Ridgeway Foundation · The a Montgomery Ward Foundation · John and Kathleen Schreiber Foundation · Helen V Brach 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 organisation EDMOND AND ALICE OPLER 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.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: CORAZON A CORAZON.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~7 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 7 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 320010771 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on CORAZON A CORAZON, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 7 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 4% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Edmond and Alice Opler Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Edmond and Alice Opler Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

EDMOND AND ALICE OPLER FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

44 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Edmond and Alice Opler Foundation?

More from the funding graph

EDMOND AND ALICE OPLER FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

44 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Edmond and Alice Opler Foundation?

More from the funding graph