Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Hobart W Williams

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.

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$147k
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 FY20202025.

Education$3.7MHuman Services$3.6M
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$147,114
Median grant
1
States reached
$24M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MONMOUTH COLLEGE$147,114
ILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY$147,114
ILLINOIS COLLEGE$147,114
CHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATION$147,114
MILLIKIN UNIVERSITY$147,114
ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE$147,114
CHICAGO CHILD CARE SOCIETY$147,114
ROCKFORD COLLEGE$147,114
MONTGOMERY PLACECHURCH HOME$147,114
CHICAGO COMMONS$147,114
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 (FY20–25, $2.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%CHICAGO COMMONS: $150k → 14%ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE: $150k → 14%CHICAGO COMMONS: $147k → 14%ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE: $147k → 14%CHICAGO COMMONS: $123k → 14%ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE: $123k → 14%CHICAGO COMMONS: $114k → 14%ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE: $114k → 14%CHICAGO COMMONS: $105k → 14%ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE: $105k → 14%CHICAGO COMMONS: $96k → 14%ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE: $96k → 14%CHICAGO CHILD CARE SOCIETY: $150k → 14%CHICAGO CHILD CARE SOCIETY: $147k → 14%CHICAGO CHILD CARE SOCIETY: $114k → 14%CHICAGO CHILD CARE SOCIETY: $105k → 14%CHICAGO CHILD CARE SOCIETY: $96k → 14%CHICAGO CHILD CARE SOCIETY: $84k → 14%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$7.2M · 10 repeat orgs$147k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +21% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

10 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
1

Total granted

$7.2M
$147k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
0%

Still filing today

80%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $147k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesOther

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

  • TA
    THE ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE
    6× · 2020–2025 · $735k · revenue +30%
  • CC
    Chicago Commons Association
    6× · 2020–2025 · $735k · revenue +81%
  • IW
    ILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
    6× · 2020–2025 · $735k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • IC
    ILLINOIS COLLEGE
    one grant, 2025 · $147k · revenue 0%

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
Lake Forest College

Provide post-secondary education leading to a baccalaureate degree. Program service expenditures are made in conjunction with the operation of a liberal arts college spread over 107 acres with approximately 63 educational and support…

Education
2
Wilson College

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

Education
3
Simpson College

Through innovative learning opportunities, individual student attention, and an unwavering commitment to inclusive educational access, simpson college cultivates a diverse community of learners to lead lives of meaning and purpose.

Education
4
Columbia College Chicago

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

Education
5
Columbia College

Columbia college improves lives by providing quality education to both traditional and nontraditional students, helping them achieve their true potential.

Education
6
Carleton College

See schedule o.founded in 1866, carleton college is a private, coeducational liberal arts college of 2,007 students located in the historic river town of northfield, minnesota. nationally recognized as the nation's top college for…

Education
7
Augustana College

Rooted in the liberal arts & sciences & lutheran expression of the christian faith, & is committed to offering a challenging education that develops qualities of mind, spirit, & body necessary for a rewarding life of leadership & service…

Education
8
Saint Xavier University

Saint xavier university, a catholic institution inspired by the heritage of the sisters of mercy, educates persons to search for truth, think critically, communicate effectively and serve wisely and compassionately in support of human…

Education
9
Hilbert College

Hilbert college is an independent institution of higher learning that embraces its catholic franciscan heritage and values. students from diverse backgrounds are educated in liberal arts and professional programs to become informed…

Education
10
Mitchell College

Mitchell college educates students through a highly individualized educational approach that brings forward each student's potential, reveals their strengths, and fosters personal growth.

Education
11
Bradley University

Bradley university empowers students for immediate and sustained success in their personal and professional endeavors by combining professional preparation, liberal arts and sciences, and co-curricular experiences. alongside our dedication…

Education
12
Macmurray College

Macmurray college transforms students' lives by providing a career-directed liberal arts education, preparing students for personal and professional success and life-long learning.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Illinois Wesleyan University and the most unlike its peers is Children's Care Foundation. 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

9 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. 9 of the 11 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MILLIKIN UNIVERSITY — $735,211 · EducationMILLIKIN UNIVERSITYILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY — $735,211 · EducationILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITYROCKFORD UNIVERSITY — $735,211 · EducationROCKFORD UNIVERSITYMONMOUTH COLLEGE — $735,211 · EducationMONMOUTH COLLEGEILLINOIS COLLEGE — $147,114 · EducationTHE ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE — $735,211 · Human ServicesTHE ADMIRAL AT THE LAKEChicago Commons Association — $735,211 · Human ServicesChicago Commons AssociationFamily Focus — $696,974 · Human ServicesFamily FocusMONTGOMERY PLACECHURCH HOME — $735,211 · OtherMONTGOMERY PLACECHURCH HOMECHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATION — $735,211 · OtherCHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATIONTRUSTEES OF ILLINOIS COLLEGE — $588,097 · OtherTRUSTEES OF ILLINOIS COLLEGE
Education$3,087,958Human Services$2,167,396Other$2,058,519

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMILLIKIN UNIVERSITY — $735,211 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetTHE ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE — $735,211 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetChicago Commons Association — $735,211 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY — $735,211 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetCHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATION — $735,211 over 6y, 14% of budgetROCKFORD UNIVERSITY — $735,211 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetMONMOUTH COLLEGE — $735,211 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetFamily Focus — $696,974 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetILLINOIS COLLEGE — $147,114 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

  • Who funds MILLIKIN UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds THE ADMIRAL AT THE LAKE
  • Who funds Chicago Commons Association
  • Who funds ILLINOIS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATION
  • Who funds ROCKFORD UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds MONMOUTH COLLEGE
  • Who funds Family Focus
  • Who funds ILLINOIS COLLEGE

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.

The Chicago Community TrustIL14.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Hobart W Williams 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%1%4%8%15%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
    1report 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 11 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph