Skip to content
Edward and Shirley Marx Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Edward and Shirley Marx 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.

$83k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$48k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Community Improvement$113kFood & Nutrition$77kYouth Development$40kReligion$28kHuman Services$21kEducation$20kPublic Benefit$10kHealth$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$15,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$623k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WOMEN'S BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER$48,000
JK COMMUNITY FARM$15,000
AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATION$10,000
SMA FOUNDATION$10,000
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 (FY17–17, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 9% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%EXPANDING BORDERS: $5k → 10%MISERICORDIA HOME: $500 → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
WY
OH
VA
TN
DC
MS
GA
TX
FL
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.

58%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$188k · 5 repeat orgs$139k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
27

Total granted

$188k
$139k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-1%
+36%

Still filing today

80%
59%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’20’22’23’24’25
EducationHealthHuman ServicesArts & CultureAnimalsFood & NutritionOther
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

  • WB
    WOMEN'S BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER
    2× · 2017–2025 · $83k · revenue +262%
  • SF
    SMA FOUNDATION
    3× · 2023–2025 · $40k
  • JC
    JK COMMUNITY FARM
    3× · 2023–2025 · $25k · revenue -32%

Funded once

  • GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +17%
  • The Houston Food Bankgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +36%
  • NB
    NEW BEGINNINGS CHURCH OF CHICAGO
    one grant, 2017 · $15k
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
Columbia College Chicago

The organization's mission is to educate students for creative occupations in diverse fields of arts and media.

Education
2
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
3
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

The children's hospital of philadelphia, the oldest hospital in the united states dedicated exclusively to pediatrics, strives to be the world leader in the advancement of health care for children by integrating excellent patient care,…

Health
4
Junior Achievement of Chicago

To inspire and prepare young people to succeed in a global economy

International
5
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

—
6
Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce

The chicagoland chamber of commerce combines the power of people, with our legacy of leadership and business advocacy, to drive a dynamic economy. we focus on delivering value for our members, making chicagoland a world-class place to live…

—
7
The Commercial Club of Chicago

See schedule othe purpose of the commercial club of chicago is to promote the social and economic vitality of the metropolitan area of chicago.

—
8
American Water Works Association

To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.

Public Benefit
9
Nourishing Hope

Nourishing hope provides food, mental health support, and social services to help all our neighbors thrive.

—
10
Chicago Psychoanalytic Institute

The chicago psychoanalytic institute transforms the lives of individuals, families and communities, using psychoanalytic knowledge to help them grow and thrive.

Social Science
11
Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago

Achieving international impact through world-class research and education in fundamental computer science and information technology.

Education
12
Wilson College

Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Albany Park Community Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Paws Inc. 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

21 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. 21 of the 32 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
14/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WOMEN'S BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $83,000 · OtherWOMEN'S BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTERSMA FOUNDATION: $40,000 · OtherSMA FOUNDATIONThe Houston Food Bank: $25,000 · OtherThe Houston Food BankAMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATIONS INC: $20,000 · OtherAMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATIONS INCNEW BEGINNINGS CHURCH OF CHICAGO: $15,000 · OtherNEW BEGINNINGS CHURCH OF CHICAGOALBANY PARK COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $14,705 · OtherALBANY PARK COMMUNITY CENTER INCTHE JEWISH CLUB OF CHICAGO: $12,975 · OtherTHE JEWISH CLUB OF CHICAGOWARD 39 CITY OF CHICAGO: $10,000 · Other+10 more: $9,354 · OtherGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $25,000 · Food & NutritionGREATER CHICAGO F…JK COMMUNITY FARM: $25,000 · Food & NutritionJK COMMUNITY FARMTHE MOVING AND STORAGE INSTITUTE: $20,000 · EducationTHE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO: $2,500 · EducationPELOTONIA: $1,000 · EducationTHE SERVICE CLUB OF CHICAGO: $10,000 · Community ImprovementEXPANDING BORDERS: $5,000 · Human ServicesMISERICORDIA HOME: $500 · Human ServicesST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $5,000 · HealthLEUKEMIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $250 · HealthColonial Williamsburg Foundation: $1,200 · Arts & CultureMUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART: $150 · Arts & CultureLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $1,000 · AnimalsPAWS INC: $100 · Animals
Other$230,034Food & Nutrition$50,000Education$23,500Community Improvement$10,000Human Services$5,500Health$5,250Arts & Culture$1,350Animals$1,100

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWOMEN'S BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $83,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJK COMMUNITY FARM: $25,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetThe Houston Food Bank: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE MOVING AND STORAGE INSTITUTE: $20,000 over 2y, 5.6% of budgetAMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATIONS INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SERVICE CLUB OF CHICAGO: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEXPANDING BORDERS: $5,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetTHE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetColonial Williamsburg Foundation: $1,200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMISERICORDIA HOME: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWOMEN HELPING WOMEN: $450 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEASTER SEALS INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAWS INC: $100 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGRANT PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION INC: $100 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Network for GoodFidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Network for GoodDC7.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Network for Good · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Edward and Shirley Marx Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Edward and Shirley Marx Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Edward and Shirley Marx Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Edward and Shirley Marx Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 32 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 Edward and Shirley Marx’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