Skip to content
Equality Illinois Institute at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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.

$92k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Civil Rights$530kHealth$77kHuman Services$29kArts & Culture$26kReligion$8kEducation$7k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $80,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $92,167 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $12,167 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $30k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EQUALITY TEXAS FOUNDATION$50,000
EQUALITY ILLINOIS$30,000
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 (FY18–21, $27k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%RAINBOW CAFE LGBTQ CENTER: $27k → 13%CHICAGO BLACK GAY MEN'S CAUCUS: $250 → 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.
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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$486k · 7 repeat orgs$191k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +24% since the first grant, against +5% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
12

Total granted

$486k
$141k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
+5%

Still filing today

71%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 38% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthCivil RightsHuman ServicesPhilanthropyEducationAnimalsOther
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

  • EI
    EQUALITY ILLINOIS
    8× · 2017–2024 · $424k · revenue +198% · 54% of their budget
  • PP
    PRAIRIE PRIDE COALITION INC
    3× · 2018–2021 · $25k
  • PP
    PEORIA PROUD
    2× · 2018–2019 · $9k

Funded once

  • TP
    The Phoenix Community Center
    one grant, 2021 · $48k · revenue -13%
  • AE
    ACORN EQUALITY FUND
    one grant, 2021 · $35k · revenue -2% · 65% of their budget
  • RC
    RAINBOW CAFE LGBTQ CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $27k · revenue +93%
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
The Chicago Area Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce

To promote economic opportunities for the lgbt community by being an advocate and resource for all member businesses that encorage equality.

Philanthropy
2
Equality Illinois

Equality illinois builds a better illinois by advancing equal treatment and social justice through education, advocacy and protection of the rights of the lgbt community.

Philanthropy
3
Equity Alliance Health of Illinois

Funds will be used to provide pharmaceuticals, support, resources, and programs to communities of color, lgbtq, and other oppressed communities.

Civil Rights
4
Coalition for Rainbow Alliances Inc

The Coalition of Rainbow Alliances (CORAL) is a non-profit, volunteer group that facilitates networking and community for the Central Illinois lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community, all other sexual and gender minorities, their…

Civil Rights
5
Rainbow Access Initiative dba Prism Counseling and Advocacy

Prism Counseling and Advocacy was established to ensure that comprehensive, accessible, and culturally appropriate mental and physical health care are provided to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ+) people, families,…

Health
6
Eqtx Equality Texas dba Equality Texas

EQTX Equality Texas dba Equality Texas works to secure full equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer Texans through political action, education, community organizing, and collaboration.

—
7
Afro Pride Federation Inc

Afro Pride fosters the mental and social wellness of the Afrocentric LGBTQ community and those who love and support them.

Human Services
8
St Louis Queer Support & Healing

To strengthen the St. Louis queer/LGBTQIA+ communitys ability to navigate conflict/harm by building our collective capacity for peer support, healing justice, and systems change, through education, community-building, and storytelling.

Health
9
Pride St Louis Inc

To foster understanding and equality for the LGBTQIA community

Civil Rights
10
Phoenix Pride Inc

Phoenix pride unites, educates, and engages people to support and empower the lgbtq community and our allies.

Civil Rights
11
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.

Human Services
12
The Up Center of Champaign County

Exists to create a Champaign County where all who identify as sexual and/or gender minorities can life full, healthy, and vibrant lives.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Affinity Community Services; the most unlike its peers is The Phoenix Center 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

15 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. 15 of the 20 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
8/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EQUALITY ILLINOIS: $424,000 · PhilanthropyEQUALITY ILLINOISEQTX Equality Texas Foundation: $50,000 · Civil RightsEQTX Equality T…ACORN EQUALITY FUND: $35,000 · Civil RightsACORN EQUALITY …PEORIA PROUD: $8,720 · Civil RightsPEORIA PROUDThe Phoenix Community Center: $48,050 · HealthThe Phoenix …PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $10,000 · HealthPLANNED PARE…WRITERS PLANNERS TRAINERS: $6,500 · HealthWRITERS PLAN…AFFINITY COMMUNITY SERVICES: $6,000 · HealthAFFINITY COM…+1 more: $1,150 · HealthPRAIRIE PRIDE COALITION INC: $25,200 · OtherCHICAGO ABORTION FUND: $10,000 · OtherCARBONDALE UNITARIAN FELLOWSHIP: $8,370 · Other+4 more: $4,750 · OtherRAINBOW CAFE LGBTQ CENTER: $27,000 · Human Services+1 more: $250 · Human ServicesTHE PHOENIX CENTER INC: $7,040 · EducationASSOCIATION OF LATINOS LATINAS LATINXS MOTIVATING ACTION CORP: $5,000 · Animals
Philanthropy$424,000Civil Rights$93,720Health$71,700Other$48,320Human Services$27,250Education$7,040Animals$5,000

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 budgetEQUALITY ILLINOIS: $424,000 over 8y, 54% of budgetEQTX Equality Texas Foundation: $50,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetThe Phoenix Community Center: $48,050 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetACORN EQUALITY FUND: $35,000 over 1y, 65% of budgetCHICAGO ABORTION FUND: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PHOENIX CENTER INC: $7,040 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWRITERS PLANNERS TRAINERS: $6,500 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetPublic Health Institute of Metropolitan Chicago: $1,150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSITHUB: $1,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

Pritzker Family Found…The Chicago Community…Amazonsmile Foundation
Pritzker Family FoundationIL13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Pritzker Family Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · 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 Equality Illinois Institute funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Equality Illinois Institute. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • The Phoenix Center Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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.

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 20 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $12k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Equality Illinois Institute’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