· Private foundation
Joan and Norman Chapman Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k23 grants · $79k
- $10k–50k16 grants · $373k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NORTHSHORE UNIVERSITY HEALTHSYSTEM | $50,000 |
| KEEP MEMORY ALIVE | $50,000 |
| AM SHALOM | $47,000 |
| MAKE-A-WISH ILLINOIS | $43,900 |
| ISRAEL TENNIS CENTER FOUNDATION | $35,833 |
| SERENITY FOUNDATION | $35,000 |
| STANFORD UNIVERSITY | $33,333 |
| CLEVELAND CLINIC LOU RUVO CENTER | $28,000 |
| MCLANE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL | $25,000 |
| JEWISH UNITED FUND | $25,000 |
| NORTHWESTERN MEMORIAL FOUNDATION | $18,800 |
| GLENBROOK SOUTH HIGH SCHOOL | $18,372 |
| THE SELFHELP HOME | $12,500 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO | $10,000 |
| AMERICAN SOCIETY OF GASTROINTESTINAL ENDO | $10,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $221k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +35% since the first grant, against +23% for the ones you funded once.
43 repeat relationships — 23 still active in FY2024, 20 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $85k 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
- ACADVOCATE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION2× · 2017–2018 · $410k · revenue +18%
- EHEndeavor Health Clinical Operations6× · 2019–2024 · $300k · revenue +22%
- CHChildren's Hospital Corporation6× · 2017–2022 · $187k · revenue +69%
Funded once
- CFCLEVELAND FOUNDATION CLINICone grant, 2020 · $68k
- BCBaylor College of Medicinegraduatedone grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +67%
- TCTHE CENTER FOR ENRICHED LIVING INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +70%
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.
Uchicago medicine network, inc. supports and encourages health and human service by providing support, directly or indirectly to ingalls memorial hospital, the university of chicago medical center, and other related tax-exempt…
We value excellence and innovation in clinical and basic research, coordinated and comprehensive patient care, ongoing physician education, and evidence-based child advocacy. our goal is to provide leadership in endeavors that promote the…
We are dedicated to the health and well-being of all children. as the pediatric teaching facility for the northwestern university feinberg school of medicine, this commitment drives us to be a leader in: -pediatric health care delivery…
Stanley manne children's research institute strives to generate new knowledge and advance the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of pediatric diseases.
The corporation is organized and is operated exclusively for charitable, educational and scientific purposes. all children's research institute supports, encourages, and engages in and conducts medical research and other research in…
Provide pediatric and subspecialty surgical, research, and educational services.
The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…
The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…
The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.
To significantly improve the lives of people with down syndrome through research, medical care, education and advocacy. an important part of this mission is to support the global affiliate organizations that we helped establish and…
The children's hospital of philadelphia, the oldest hospital in the united states dedicated exclusively to pediatrics, strives to be the world leader in the advancement of health care for children by integrating excellent patient care,…
City of Hope National Medical Center's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Illinois Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Louise Tumarkin Zazove Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 29 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
61 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. 61 of the 116 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 ADVOCATE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Endeavor Health Clinical Operations ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Corporation ↗
- Who funds JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds SERENITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL TENNIS CENTERS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Ann & Robert H Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago Foundation ↗
- Who funds The Hap Foundation Inc (F/K/A Journeycare Foundation) ↗
- Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF ILLINOIS INC ↗
- Who funds THE SELFHELP HOME INC ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds FORE BATTEN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LOU MALNATI - CANCER RESEARCH FUND ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds Baylor College of Medicine ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR ENRICHED LIVING INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDRENS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ↗
- Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
- Who funds NORTHEAST ARC INC ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO SCULPTURE EXHIBIT ↗
- Who funds THE DISCOVERY LAND COMPANY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds University of Chicago ↗
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: Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · The Chicago Community Trust · Circle of Service Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust 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 Joan and Norman Chapman Foundation 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.
- Northeast Arc Inc — 73% of income from government
- Children's Hospital Corporation — 10% of income from government
- Yellow Ribbon Fund Inc — 0% of income from government
- Shriners Hospitals for Children — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Joan and Norman Chapman Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Joan and Norman Chapman Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.