Loading…
· Public charity
EQUALITY ILLINOIS INSTITUTE
EQUALITY ILLINOIS INSTITUTE builds a better illinois by advancing equal treatment and social justice through education, advocacy and protection of the rights of the lgbt community.
$69k
Granted FY2023
1
Grants
1
Communities
$58k
Largest
01What you fund
0192% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2023.
Philanthropy$394kHealth$72kCivil Rights$44kHuman Services$27kEducation$7kAnimals$5kOther$48k
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
stakeholder engagement
2020
—
2021
stakeholder engagement
2022
activitiesreproductive
2023
—
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2023 · 1 grant
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
$57,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
- EQUALITY ILLINOIS$57,500
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 (FY18–21, $27k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — 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.
76%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$456k · 7 repeat orgs$141k to everyone else
7 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2023, 6 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
7
12
Total granted
$456k
$141k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+5%
+93%
Still filing today
71%
75%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2023, 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
HealthCivil RightsHuman ServicesPhilanthropyEducationAnimalsOther
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
- EIEQUALITY ILLINOIS6× · 2018–2023 · $394k · revenue +30% · 54% of their budget
- TPTHE PHOENIX CENTER INC2× · 2018–2019 · $7k · revenue +3%
- WPWRITERS PLANNERS TRAINERS INC2× · 2018–2019 · $7k · revenue +5%
Funded once
- PCPHOENIX CENTERgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $48k · revenue +198%
- AEACORN EQUALITY FUNDone grant, 2021 · $35k · revenue -40% · 65% of their budget
- RCRAINBOW CAFE LGBTQ CENTERone grant, 2021 · $27k
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
The Chicago Area Gay and Lesbian Chamber
To promote economic opportunities for the lgbt community by being an advocate and resource for all member businesses that encorage equality.
Philanthropy
2
The Center for Black Health and Equity
Health
3
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
4
Black Phoenix Organizing Collective
Black Phoenix Organizing Collective is building a bigger, better, Blacker future in Phoenix, Arizona. We practice cultural organizing among intergenerational Black folks that centers queer and trans people, formerly incarcerated, disabled…
Food & Nutrition
5
Pflag Springfield Swmo
PFLAG is an organization of LGBTQ+ people, parents, families, and allies who work together to create an equitable and inclusive world. We lead with love to support families, educate allies, and advocate for just, equitable, and inclusive…
—
6
True Chicago
Arts & Culture
7
Chicago United for Equity
Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.
Civil Rights
8
Taskforce Prevention and Community Services
The organization is committed to improving the sexual health and well being of lgbt and youth of color in chicago by providing a safe space for fellowship, hiv-sti screening and education, and on-site referrals to medical , housing, and…
—
9
Presence Chicago Hospitals Network
To improve the health and well-being of all people in the communities we serve.
Human Services
10
Chicago Freedom Trust
Philanthropy
11
African American Office of Gay Concerns
To comprehensively serve as resource for the wellbeing of gay men of color inclusive but not limited to the gay bisexual transgender
—
12
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
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Equality Illinois and the most unlike its peers is Acorn Equality Fund. 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
14 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
10/14
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Philanthropy$394,000Health$71,700Other$48,320Civil Rights$43,720Human Services$27,250Education$7,040Animals$5,000
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 EQUALITY ILLINOIS ↗
- Who funds PHOENIX CENTER ↗
- Who funds ACORN EQUALITY FUND ↗
- Who funds RAINBOW CAFE LGBTQ CENTER ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO ABORTION FUND ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds PEORIA PROUD ↗
- Who funds THE PHOENIX CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds WRITERS PLANNERS TRAINERS INC ↗
- Who funds AFFINITY COMMUNITY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION OF LATINOAS MOTIVATING ACTION ↗
- Who funds PHIMC ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO THERAPY COLLECTIVE ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO BLACK GAY MEN'S CAUCUS ↗
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.
Alphawood FoundationIL15.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Alphawood Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Chicago Foundation for Women · Crossroads Fund Inc · 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 organisation EQUALITY ILLINOIS INSTITUTE 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
’20’21’22’23’24
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, FY20–24
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: ACORN EQUALITY FUND.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
insufficient risk
Limited financial data in public filings.
Track record & reputation
low risk
7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 371388484 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 ACORN EQUALITY FUND, 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
- Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
- WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2025; revenue contracted over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 65% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
- 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 Equality Illinois Institute?
Find your warmest path to Equality Illinois Institute 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