Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Edward Hospital

Edward Hospital follows the mission of Endeavor Health to "help everyone in our communities be their best."

$1.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$700k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Health$2.4MEnvironment$700kCommunity Improvement$374kHuman Services$50kPhilanthropy$42kFood & Nutrition$28kYouth Development$20kHousing & Shelter$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 4 grants below total $1,024,640 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,108,619 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $83,979 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 · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $36k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $289k
  • $250k+1 grant · $700k
$238,900
Median grant
1
States reached
$705M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Riverwalk Bicentennial Fund$700,000
DuPage Health Coalition$238,900
Greater Joliet Area YMCA$50,000
MCHC Service Corporation$35,740
02The need
03

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 (FY17–23, $58k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 17% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%HESSED HOUSE SHELTER: $10k → 8%Loaves and Fishes: $15k → 7%Loaves and Fishes: $8k → 7%LOAVES AND FISHES COMMUNITY SERVICES: $6k → 7%360 YOUTH SERVICES: $5k → 7%360 YOUTH SERVICES: $5k → 7%360 YOUTH SERVICES: $5k → 7%360 YOUTH SERVICES: $5k → 7%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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.

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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.8M · 16 repeat orgs$862k to everyone else

16 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
6

Total granted

$2.8M
$76k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
+85%

Still filing today

69%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 23% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $786k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyEnvironmentOther

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

  • DH
    DUPAGE HEALTH COALITION
    6× · 2017–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +136%
  • AC
    ADVOCATE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION
    6× · 2017–2023 · $210k · revenue +18%
  • PS
    PLAINFIELD SHOREWOOD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
    6× · 2017–2023 · $96k · revenue +56%

Funded once

  • D
    DUPAGEBIZgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +85%
  • AH
    AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2018 · $15k
  • AH
    American Heart Association Incgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $13k · revenue +43%

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.

1
Cook County Chamber
Philanthropy
2
Illinois Business Alliance

The illinois business alliance is a nonprofit, member-driven business league that exists to improve illinois' business climate and promote the common economic interests of its members.

3
Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce

The chamber is a member association designed to be the leading advocate for the business community of the greater dayton region. its mission is to work shoulder to shoulder with businesses to help them succeed.

4
Ohio Chamber of Commerce

As the state's leading business advocate and resource, the ohio chamber of commerce aggressively champions free enterprise, economic competitiveness and growth for the benefit of all ohioans.

5
The Peoria Area Chamber of Commerce

The peoria area chamber of commerce is a membership organization of businesses, delivering value to its members by 1) cultivating a thriving business community, 2) presenting the united voice of local business to government, 3) offering…

6
Lakeshore Chamber of Commerce

To be a voice for business and a forum for the exchange of ideas and through a variety of chamber programs and services, strengthen the economic vitality of east chicago, hammond, and northwest indiana.

Community Improvement
7
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and Industry

The minnesota chamber of commerce proactively leads the business community statewide to: advance pro-business, responsible minnesota public policy that creates jobs and grows the econony; provde member services to address evolving business…

8
Eau Claire Area Chamber of Commerce

The eau claire area chamber of commerce, a not-for-profit business membership organization with steady membership around 1,200 members, is the advocate of business striving to enhance and protect the business environment and quality of…

9
Michigan Chamber of Commerce

To promote conditions favorable to job creation and business success in michigan.

10
Oak Lawn Chamber of Commerce

To represent and advance its business community striving with constant integrity fairness and cooperation to promote and improve the economic atmosphere business climate and image of Oak Lawn

11
Saginaw County Chamber of Commerce

To be a catalyst for economic and community progress within the great lakes bay region.

12
Mclean Co Chamber of Commerce

To support and serve our members, the mclean county chamber of commerce strives to promote commerce, advocate pro-business prospectives, collaborate to lead change, and engage in action for results that strengthen the prosperity of the…

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Illinois Chamber of Commerce and the most unlike its peers is Riverwalk Bicentennial Fund. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyMedical Specialty SocietiesLabor Union LocalsFamily Philanthropic Founda…Local Business & Economic D…Independent K-12 Schools
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 38 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%10%<5yr16%0%5–10yr19%14%10–20yr15%24%20–35yr11%24%35–55yr15%29%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%21%<5yr16%0%5–10yr19%3%10–20yr15%61%20–35yr11%10%35–55yr15%5%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 10% of your grantees by number, and just 21% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 4% lost their exemption, against 16% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
4%1/26
the rest of the field
16%
3,523/22,147

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.

04the grantee network

20 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 20 of the 26 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/20
Grantees still filing
12/20
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

DUPAGE HEALTH COALITION — $2,034,933 · HealthDUPAGE HEALTH COALITIONADVOCATE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION — $209,660 · HealthADVOCATE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION+2 more — $48,240 · HealthRIVERWALK BICENTENNIAL FUND — $700,000 · EnvironmentRIVERWALK BICENTENNIA…PLAINFIELD SHOREWOOD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $95,531 · OtherPLAINFIELD SHORE…ILLINOIS HEALTH AND HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION — $62,826 · OtherILLINOIS HEALTH …NAPERVILLE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $61,668 · OtherNAPERVILLE AREA …DuPage County Health Department — $50,000 · OtherDuPage County He…YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION JOLIET — $50,000 · OtherYOUNG MEN'S CHRI…CHOOSE DUPAGE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE FOUNDATION — $37,500 · OtherCHOOSE DUPAGE EC…PROACTIVE KIDS FOUNDATION — $32,740 · OtherPROACTIVE KIDS F…JOLIET WILL COUNTY CENTER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT — $32,500 · OtherJOLIET WILL COUN…ILLINOIS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $25,455 · OtherWILL COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $22,000 · OtherOswego Chamber of Commerce — $20,000 · Other+3 more — $36,500 · Other+3 moreLOAVES & FISHES COMMUNITY SERVICES — $28,150 · Human Services360 YOUTH SERVICES — $20,000 · Human ServicesPUBLIC ACTION TO DELIVER SHELTER INC D/B/A HESED HOUSE — $10,000 · Human ServicesUNITED WAY OF WILL COUNTY — $29,700 · PhilanthropyTHE DUPAGE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $12,225 · PhilanthropyDUPAGEBIZ — $25,000 · Community ImprovementOSWEGO AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $7,422 · Community Improvement
Health$2,292,833Environment$700,000Other$526,720Human Services$58,150Philanthropy$41,925Community Improvement$32,422

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetDUPAGE HEALTH COALITION — $2,034,933 over 6y, 17% of budgetRIVERWALK BICENTENNIAL FUND — $700,000 over 1y, 97% of budgetADVOCATE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION — $209,660 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetPLAINFIELD SHOREWOOD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $95,531 over 6y, 5.8% of budgetILLINOIS HEALTH AND HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION — $62,826 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNAPERVILLE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $61,668 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION JOLIET — $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMCHC CHICAGO HOSPITAL COUNCIL — $35,740 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetPROACTIVE KIDS FOUNDATION — $32,740 over 2y, 44% of budgetUNITED WAY OF WILL COUNTY — $29,700 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetLOAVES & FISHES COMMUNITY SERVICES — $28,150 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetILLINOIS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $25,455 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetDUPAGEBIZ — $25,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetWILL COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $22,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budget360 YOUTH SERVICES — $20,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetNAPERVILLE DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP — $15,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc — $12,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE DUPAGE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $12,225 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPUBLIC ACTION TO DELIVER SHELTER INC D/B/A HESED HOUSE — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budget
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.

Edward-Elmhurst HealthcareIL13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Edward-Elmhurst Healthcare · Amazonsmile 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 Edward Hospital 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 26 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph