· Public charity
Illinois Association of Court Appointed Special Advocates
Supports and promotes court appointed volunteer advocacy for children who have experienced abuse or neglect.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k1 grant · $44k
- $50k–250k21 grants · $3.0M
- $250k+8 grants · $2.9M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CASA OF SOUTHWESTERN ILLINOIS | $573,200 |
| MACON COUNTY CASA | $386,313 |
| ADVOCACY NETWORK FOR CHILDRENCASA OF ADAMS COUNTY | $365,440 |
| CASA KANE COUNTY | $354,648 |
| CASA LAKE COUNTY | $318,586 |
| SOUTH CENTRAL ILLINOISMARION | $303,291 |
| CASA OF VERMILION COUNTY | $295,345 |
| CHAMPAIGN COUNTY CASA | $255,045 |
| CASA OF WILL COUNTY | $232,962 |
| CASA OF DUPAGE COUNTY | $205,276 |
| CASA OF FRANKLIN & HAMILTON COUNTIES | $199,683 |
| CASA OF THE 10TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT | $197,109 |
| CASA OF SALINE COUNTY INC | $180,313 |
| CASA OF MCHENRY COUNTY | $173,120 |
| WINNEBAGO COUNTY CASA | $167,493 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $2.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
31 repeat relationships — 30 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- COCASA OF SOUTHWESTERN ILLINOIS6× · 2020–2025 · $2.1M · revenue +34% · 49% of their budget
CASA LAKE COUNTY INC6× · 2020–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +79%- COCASA OF THE TENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT6× · 2020–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +19% · 30% of their budget
Funded once
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Child Advocacy Services
To provide all abused and neglected children with a voice in the court process.
Recruit and train community volunteers to speak out for abused and neglected children in court proceedings so that they can be permanently placed in a safe, nuturing enviroment as quickly as possible.
Advocate in the judicial system for the best interest of victims of abuse and neglect in foster care, giving the child a voice in court and moving the child to a safe and permanent home.
The program provides organization structure, leadership and training for community volunteers who serve as court appointed special advocates(casa) for agbused and neglected children in south central missouri.
Casa is a program to advocate for abused and neglected children in the legal and foster system.
Serve nbsp;as nbsp;court nbsp;appointed nbsp;special nbsp;advocates nbsp;for nbsp;abused nbsp;and nbsp;neglected nbsp;children nbsp;in nbsp;the nbsp;judicial nbsp;system
None
To provide the court with objective information regarding the status of children involved in abuse or neglect cases. Duties of the appointed advocate would include gathering information, developing recommendations, and providing written…
To promote and support professionally trained Court Appointed Special Advocates for abused and neglected children in need of safety, stability, and permanency, brought to the attention of the Juvenile Courts, giving them the opportunity to…
Heartland casa (court appointed special advocates) supports abused and neglected children in the court system through recruiting and training informed, caring volunteers who speaks for these children.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Casa of Southeastern Illinois Inc and the most unlike its peers is Casa of Kendall County. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 30 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
28 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 28 of the 31 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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 CASA OF SOUTHWESTERN ILLINOIS ↗
- Who funds CASA LAKE COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds CASA OF THE TENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT ↗
- Who funds CASA KANE COUNTY ↗
- Who funds ADVOCACY NETWORK FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds MACON COUNTY CASA ↗
- Who funds CHAMPAIGN COUNTY CASA INC ↗
- Who funds CASA OF VERMILION COUNTY ↗
- Who funds CASA OF RIVER VALLEY ↗
- Who funds CASA OF DUPAGE COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds WINNEBAGO COUNTY CASA ↗
- Who funds CASA OF EAST CENTRAL ILLINOIS ↗
- Who funds CASA of South Central Illinois ↗
- Who funds CASA OF MCHENRY COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds CASA DeKalb County Inc ↗
- Who funds CASA OF FRANKLIN & HAMILTON COUNTIES ↗
- Who funds COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF COOK COUNTY ↗
- Who funds CASA OF WEST CENTRAL ILLINOIS ↗
- Who funds CASA of Effingham County ↗
- Who funds CASA OF SOUTHERN ILLINOIS INC ↗
- Who funds CASA OF JEFFERSON COUNTY ↗
- Who funds CASA OF SOUTHEASTERN ILLINOIS INC ↗
- Who funds CASA OF KENDALL COUNTY ↗
- Who funds CASA - 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT ↗
- Who funds CASA OF JERSEY AND GREENE COUNTIES ↗
- Who funds BOONE COUNTY CASA ↗
- Who funds EVERYCHILD ↗
- Who funds CASA OF THE ILLINOIS VALLEY ↗
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.
Open a dossier: National Court Appointed Special Advocate Association · George M Eisenberg Foundation for Charities · AbbVie Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Baird Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable 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 organization Illinois Association of Court Appointed Special Advocates 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.
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.