Loading…
· Public charity
Enlace Chicago
Making a positive difference in the lives of all little village residents.
$309k
Granted FY2025
8
Grants
1
Communities
$109k
Largest
01What you fund
0177% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2025.
Youth Development$783kHuman Services$673kRecreation & Sports$179kHealth$173kArts & Culture$93kPhilanthropy$17kOther$570k
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
2019
design
2020
prevention progamming
2021
prevention progamming
2022
—
2023
—
2025
—
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2025 · 8 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k7 grants · $195k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $109k
$28,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
- New Life Center of Chicago$109,250
- Chicago Youth Boxing Club$30,000
- Central States SER$29,000
- Erie Neighborhood House$28,000
- Mt Sinai Hospital$27,000
- Telpochcalli Community$27,000
- Beyond the Ball$27,000
- Universidad Popular$27,000
02The need
04
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 (FY18–25, $673k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 12%. 100% 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.
94%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.3M · 11 repeat orgs$146k to everyone else
11 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
11
5
Total granted
$2.3M
$146k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+88%
+171%
Still filing today
91%
60%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 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 ServicesYouth DevelopmentHealthPhilanthropyRecreation & SportsArts & 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
- NLNew Life Center of Chicago7× · 2018–2025 · $599k · revenue +1544%
- UPUniversidad Popular7× · 2018–2025 · $304k · revenue +56%
- TCTelpochcalli Community7× · 2018–2025 · $303k · revenue +53%
Funded once
- LPLATINOS PRGRESANDOgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $93k · revenue +171%
- MSMOUNT SINAI HOSPITALone grant, 2018 · $27k
- DFDESIGN FOR DIGNITYone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue -22%
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
University of Chicago Medical Center
Our mission is to provide superior health care in a compassionate manner, ever mindful of each patient's dignity and individuality. to accomplish our mission, we call upon the skills and expertise of all who work together to advance…
Health
2
North Chicago Community Partners
Education
3
Loyola University of Chicago
We are one of the nation's largest jesuit, catholic universities with over 17,000 students. we work to expand knowledge through learning, justice, and faith.
Education
4
Presence Chicago Hospitals Network
To improve the health and well-being of all people in the communities we serve.
Human Services
5
Chicago Learning Exchange
The Chicago Learning Exchange (CLX) is a nonprofit organization that connects and supports our city's array of out-of-school time youth-focused organizations in order to prepare youth, youth workers, and our city for the future.
Youth Development
6
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
7
University of Chicago
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.
Education
8
Northern Illinois Medical Center
To provide quality health care services with innovative and responsible use of resources and promote wellness for the mchenry county area.
Health
9
L'arche Chicago Inc
L'arche chicago provides a home life where people with and without intellectual disabilities live together as peers, create inclusive relationships and transform society to the greater public. l'arche chicago is an intentional community…
Health
10
Mchc Chicago Hospital Council
The organization provides various services to the hospital community and the general public, including the operation of the illinois poison control center.
Health
11
Columbia College Chicago
The organization's mission is to educate students for creative occupations in diverse fields of arts and media.
Education
12
Chicago United for Equity
Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.
Civil Rights
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Life Centers of Chicagoland and the most unlike its peers is Mount Sinai Hospital Medical Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
13 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
11/13
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Youth Development$783,237Human Services$672,515Other$570,350Recreation & Sports$178,862Health$172,925Arts & Culture$93,000Philanthropy$17,000
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.
- Who funds New Life Center of Chicago ↗
- Who funds Universidad Popular ↗
- Who funds Telpochcalli Community ↗
- Who funds Erie Neighborhood House ↗
- Who funds Beyond the Ball ↗
- Who funds Chicago Youth Boxing Club ↗
- Who funds YMCA OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds Central States SER ↗
- Who funds Mt Sinai Hospital ↗
- Who funds LATINOS PRGRESANDO ↗
- Who funds THE LEARNING CENTER THE HOUSE OF CONNECTIONS ↗
- Who funds DESIGN FOR DIGNITY ↗
- Who funds FOREFRONT ↗
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.
United Way of Metropolitan Chicago IncIL19.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · The Chicago Community Trust · Robert R McCormick Foundation · Greater Chicago Food Depository · Laureus Sport for Good Foundation USA · Imc Chicago Charitable Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur · Charities Aid Foundation America · Local Initiatives Support Corporation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc
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 Enlace Chicago 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 · 0–25%
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: Telpochcalli Community.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~25 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 6 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
6 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +53% since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 710961074 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 Telpochcalli Community, 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 25 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 23% 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 Enlace Chicago?
Find your warmest path to Enlace Chicago 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.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines