How much did Invest for Kids Inc grant in FY2024?

Education$4.3MYouth Development$1.2MHuman Services$810kCommunity Improvement$400kArts & Culture$270kRecreation & Sports$220kEnvironment$200kPhilanthropy$35kHealth$20kOther$344k

02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

$10k–50k4 grants · $76k
$50k–250k9 grants · $1.7M

$200,000

Median grant

States reached

$719k

Total assets

Largest grants

Metro Squash$200,000
Legal Prep Charter Academies$200,000
Atlas Fellows Inc$200,000
Camp For All Kids$200,000
Ingenuity Incorporated Chicag$200,000
Chicago Eco HouseNehemiahGrp$200,000
College Possible Chicago$200,000
Great Lakes Academy Inc$200,000
Chicago Scholars$73,600
IL Network of Charter Schools$35,500
DePaul University-Division of$20,000
CareerSpring Foundation$10,000
Harris Theater-ATP$10,000

02The need

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 (FY21–23, $810k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 13%. 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.

40%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$3.1M · 17 repeat orgs$4.6M to everyone else

17 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$3.1M

$3.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%

+91%

Still filing today

94%

96%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.2M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyOther

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

CS
Chicago Scholars
5× · 2020–2024 · $354k · revenue +24%
CP
College Possible Chicago
2× · 2020–2024 · $220k · revenue +76%
TB
The Bloc
2× · 2022–2023 · $210k · revenue +1493%

Funded once

BT
Beat the Streets Chicagograduated
one grant, 2023 · $200k · revenue +165%
CR
Childrens Research Trianglegraduated
one grant, 2022 · $200k · revenue +53%
CN
Code Nation ScriptEd Inc
one grant, 2022 · $200k · 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.

Chicago Education Partnership

To create a school that dramatically transforms the lives of k-8 students and prepares them for success in college and in life through: the delivery of a rigorous and personalized academic program, a focus on holistic education, and the…

Education

Kipp Chicago Schools

The team at kipp chicago schools is guided by a simple, yet powerful mission: to create a network of excellent schools in chicago that teach our students the character and academic skills necessary to succeed in college and beyond, and to…

Education

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

The University of Chicago Charter School Corporation

To Prepare Students for Success in Four-Year Colleges.

Education

Academy for Global Citizenship

Agc is a chicago public charter school serving students from kindergartern through eighth grade

Education

A Better Chicago

A better chicago is changing how chicago fights poverty by investing in bold ideas that create opportunity for our youth

Human Services

Tutoring Chicago

Tutoring chicago delivers the power of education through one-to-one tutoring.

Arts & Culture

Intrinsic Schools

The mission of intrinsic schools is to create a revolutionary new school model in order to 1) prepare all students for postsecondary success and world-changing endeavors; and 2) provide the education community with a roadmap to sustainable…

Education

Chicago Youth Programs Inc

Tutoring and mentoring programs for inner city youth.

—

The Chicago High School for the Arts

The chicago high school for the arts (chiarts) develops the next generation of diverse, artistically promising scholar-artists through intensive pre-professional training in the arts, combined with a comprehensive college preparatory…

Education

Chicago Votes

Leadership development and non partisan civic education.

Civil Rights

Communities in Schools of Chicago

To surround students with a community of support, empowering them to stay in school and achieve in life.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chicago Collegiate Inc and the most unlike its peers is Greater Chicago Food Depository. 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 22 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/50

the rest of the field

14%

4,320/31,460

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.

04the grantee network

50 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

48/50

Grantees still filing

43/50

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Education$4,271,100Youth Development$1,190,000Human Services$810,000Community Improvement$400,000Other$598,840Arts & Culture$270,000Recreation & Sports$220,000

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.

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.

Circle of Service FoundationIL40.1× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Circle of Service Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Arie and Ida Crown Memorial · Robert R McCormick Foundation · United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · Cme Group Foundation · Imc Chicago Charitable Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan · John D and Catherine T Macarthur · Polk Bros Foundation Inc · The Allstate Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase 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 Invest for Kids Inc 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

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: GEM-IFK Venture for Education.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

high risk

5 years of Form 990 filings, no recent filing.

Legal standing

medium risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 823112147 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 GEM-IFK Venture for Education, 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.
FlagSustained operations— No recent filing on record.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 78% 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 Invest for Kids Inc?

Find your warmest path to Invest for Kids Inc 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.

Invest for Kids Inc

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

50 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Invest for Kids Inc?

More from the funding graph

Invest for Kids Inc

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

50 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Invest for Kids Inc?

More from the funding graph