Skip to content

· Private foundation

Judy Peck Foundation Inc

Its FY2017 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$589k
Granted FY2017
28
Grants FY2017
8
States reached
$170k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

57% of Judy Peck Foundation Inc’s FY2017 grant dollars went to Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2017 names 21 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

01What it funds
01FY2017 · 28 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2017

  • Under $10k23 grants · $45k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $44k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $500k
$2,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SCHWAB CHARITABLE FUND$169,866
AMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION$165,374
CHICAGO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$164,845
FAMILY EQUALITY COUNCIL$22,000
THE CENTER FOR HOLOCAUST HUMAN RIGHTS & GENOCIDE EDUCATION$21,625
ST FRANCIS SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS INC (WSPCA INC)$6,500
THE LGBT COMMUNITY CENTER OF THE DESERT$6,000
Individual grant recipient$4,312
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF CENTRAL & GREATER NORTHERN NEW JERSEY INC$3,792
AM SHALOM$3,500
Individual grant recipient$3,500
THE ALLENDALE SHELTER CLUB$3,000
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC$2,000
WINDOW TO THE WORLD COMMUNICATIONS INC$2,000
LAKE FOREST COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL$2,000
02The need
02

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–17, $948) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%180 TURNING LIVES AROUND INC: $948 → 6%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
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.

Which US states its grants reach

NH
IL
WI
MI
NY
OH
NJ
CA
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Aids Foundation of Chicago

The aids foundation of chicago mobilizes communities to create equity and justice for people living with and vulnerable to hiv and related chronic disease.

Health
2
American Civil Liberties Union Fund of the District of Columbia

Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.

—
3
The Chicago Bar Foundation

The chicago bar foundation brings the legal community together through advocacy, funding, and innovation to improve access to justice for people in need and to make the legal system more fair, equitable, and effective.

Education
4
Door County Land Trust Inc

The door county land trust is a local, non-governmental non-profit organization whose mission is to preserve door county's exceptional lands and waters forever.

Environment
5
National Opinion Research Center

See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…

Social Science
6
Lakeshore Legal Aid

Standing with our neighbors, Lakeshore Legal Aid fights poverty and injustice through advocacy and by providing meaningful and dignified access to the legal system.

Crime & Legal
7
Disability Rights Wisconsin Inc

Legal protection and advocacy to protect the rights of people with disabilities in wisconsin.

—
8
Chicago Canine Rescue Foundation

Chicago canine rescue foundation finds permanent homes for homeless dogs in our community with a specific emphasis on assisting the most vulnerable animals, who without our help, would have no other options. while in our care, they are…

Animals
9
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
10
Animal Outlook Inc

Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.

Animals
11
Legal Aid Chicago

At legal aid chicago, we work together to provide high quality civil legal aid to people living in poverty and other vulnerable groups.through advocacy, education, collaboration, and litigation we empower individuals, protect fundamental…

Crime & Legal
12
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Iowa

The foundation works to defend and promote the constitution of the united states, focusing especially on the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth, and 14th amendments. the foundation also works to defend and promote the constitution of the…

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Rolling Dog Farm. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

20 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 20 of the 28 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/20
Grantees still filing
18/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $169,866 · PhilanthropyDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INCAMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION: $165,374 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATIONCHICAGO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $164,845 · OtherCHICAGO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION+15 more: $31,750 · Other+15 moreFAMILY EQUALITY: $22,000 · EducationCENTER FOR HOLOCAUST HUMAN RIGHTS & GENOCIDE EDUCATION INC: $21,625 · Education+1 more: $1,000 · EducationTHE LGBTQ COMMUNITY CENTER OF THE D: $6,000 · Civil RightsAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 · Civil RightsWINDOW TO THE WORLD COMMUNICATIONS INC: $2,000 · Arts & CultureTHE ROLLING DOG FARM: $500 · AnimalsDETROIT PIT CREW DOG RESCUE: $500 · AnimalsORPHANS OF THE STORM: $250 · AnimalsLAKE FOREST OPEN LANDS ASSOCIATION: $1,000 · Environment
Philanthropy$335,240Other$196,595Education$44,625Civil Rights$8,000Arts & Culture$2,000Animals$1,250Environment$1,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $169,866 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION: $165,374 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILY EQUALITY: $22,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCENTER FOR HOLOCAUST HUMAN RIGHTS & GENOCIDE EDUCATION INC: $21,625 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetTHE LGBTQ COMMUNITY CENTER OF THE D: $6,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWINDOW TO THE WORLD COMMUNICATIONS INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLAKE FOREST COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE THRESHOLDS: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLAKE FOREST OPEN LANDS ASSOCIATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget180 TURNING LIVES AROUND: $948 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ROLLING DOG FARM: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDETROIT PIT CREW DOG RESCUE: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCPC Foundation Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGUIDE DOGS OF THE DESERT: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLake Forest Police Foundation Inc: $250 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetORPHANS OF THE STORM: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

American Endowment FoundationOH10.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Judy Peck Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Judy Peck Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 61%
  • 180 Turning Lives Around: 61% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Judy Peck Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Judy Peck Foundation Inc 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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 28 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Judy Peck’s filings →

More from the funding graph