How much did JANE W AND DAVID M STONE CHARITABLE grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 53% of JANE W AND DAVID M STONE CHARITABLE’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

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

2018

music

2019

art

2020

—

2021

—

2022

—

2023

—

2024

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k3 grants · $9k
$10k–50k9 grants · $203k
$50k–250k4 grants · $440k

$20,000

Median grant

States reached

$15M

Total assets

Largest grants

THE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO$185,000
BY THE HAND CLUB$145,000
SECOND BAPTIST CHURCH OF EVANSTON$60,000
NOURISHING HOPE$50,000
LITTLE CITY FOUNDATION$40,000
LA CASA NORTE$40,000
NEW LIFE CENTERS$35,000
HILLSIDE FOOD PANTRY$20,000
SAN LUCAS UCC$20,000
BEARS CARE$17,500
LYRIC OPERA OF CHICAGO$10,000
OPERATION WALK CHICAGO$10,000
KENILWORTH UNION CHURCH$10,000
GOLDEN APPLE$5,000
AMERICA'S CHARITIES$2,620

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 (FY17–24, $246k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 9%. 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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$4.8M · 17 repeat orgs$270k to everyone else

17 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 8 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

$4.8M

$102k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+44%

+141%

Still filing today

47%

38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $169k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationArts & CultureHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentHealthInternationalOther

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 ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO
7× · 2017–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +4%
LC
LITTLE CITY FOUNDATION
8× · 2017–2024 · $245k · revenue +44%
OW
OPERATION WALK CHICAGO
7× · 2017–2024 · $220k · revenue +50%

Funded once

MS
MERIT SCHOOL OF MUSICgraduated
one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +139%
LL
LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA SOCIETY
one grant, 2019 · $10k
FT
FIRST TEE
one grant, 2020 · $10k

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.

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

Columbia College Chicago

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

Education

University of Chicago Medical Center

Our mission is to provide superior health care in a compassionate manner, ever mindful of each patient's dignity and individuality. to accomplish our mission, we call upon the skills and expertise of all who work together to advance…

Health

True Chicago

Arts & Culture

Gastro Intestinal Research Foundation

The GI Research Foundation works to treat, prevent, and cure digestive diseases. In collaboration with the physicians and scientists at the University of Chicago Digestive Diseases Center, we fund innovative clinical and laboratory…

Health

Illinois Institute of Technology

To provide distinctive and relevant education in an environment of scientific, technological, and professional knowledge creation and innovation.

Education

Chicago Opera Theater

Chicago opera theater expands the tradition of opera as a living art form by engaging lovers of music and storytelling through innovative experiences, predominantly of new and rarely performed works.

Arts & Culture

North Central College

We are a diverse community of learners dedicated to preparing students to be curious, engaged, ethical, and purposeful citizens and leaders in local, national and global contexts.

Education

The Chicago Innovation Foundation

Philanthropy

L'arche Chicago Inc

L'arche chicago provides a home life where people with and without intellectual disabilities live together as peers, create inclusive relationships and transform society to the greater public. l'arche chicago is an intentional community…

Health

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

Lycee Francais de Chicago Inc

Private school, serving pre-K through 12th grade students.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Music Institute of Chicago and the most unlike its peers is Start Early. 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 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/21

the rest of the field

13%

4,652/34,629

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.

05the grantee network

20 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)

20/20

Grantees still filing

18/20

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$2,774,460Education$1,427,500Human Services$246,000Health$220,000Arts & Culture$186,647Youth Development$102,000Food & Nutrition$90,000

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.

The Chicago Community TrustIL17.1× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · Charles H and Beverly E Shaw Foundation · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving 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 organisation JANE W AND DAVID M STONE CHARITABLE 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 · 0–75%

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: OPERATION WALK CHICAGO.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

medium risk

~3 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 7 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

7 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +50% since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 473148545 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 OPERATION WALK CHICAGO, 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

WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 3 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 10% of their budget — diversified.
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 Jane W and David M Stone Charitable?

Find your warmest path to Jane W and David M Stone Charitable 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.

JANE W AND DAVID M STONE CHARITABLE

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

20 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Jane W and David M Stone Charitable?

More from the funding graph

JANE W AND DAVID M STONE CHARITABLE

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

20 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Jane W and David M Stone Charitable?

More from the funding graph