· Private foundation
Leva Family Foundation
Its FY2025 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 FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k130 grants · $248k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $195k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $60k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO | $60,000 |
| UNITED WAY OF METRO CHICAGO - CHICAGO FUND FOR SAFE & PEACEFUL COMMUNITIES | $25,000 |
| METROPOLITAN FAMILY SERVICES - COMMUNITY PARTNERS FOR PEACE | $25,000 |
| PARTNERS IN HEALTH | $20,000 |
| HIGHLAND PARK COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK | $20,000 |
| GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY | $20,000 |
| NORTH SUBURBAN LEGAL AID CLINIC - SPONSOR SPRING EVENT | $20,000 |
| ERIE FAMILY HEALTH FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO | $10,000 |
| SUNSHINE ENTERPRISES NEXT LEVEL EXCHANGE | $10,000 |
| JEWISH NATIONAL FUND | $10,000 |
| BERNIE'S BOOK BANK | $8,500 |
| RISE AGAINST HUNGER | $8,035 |
| MERCY HOME FOR BOYS AND GIRLS - LUX SPONSOR | $7,500 |
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, $104k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 57% 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 +17% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
95 repeat relationships — 56 still active in FY2025, 39 since wound down; 57 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 49% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $240k 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
- JUJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO3× · 2020–2023 · $112k · revenue +13%
PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION5× · 2020–2025 · $65k · revenue +33%- NINORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK6× · 2020–2025 · $53k · revenue +8%
Funded once
- MIMEDLINE INDUSTRIES INCone grant, 2020 · $138k
- JUJEWISH UNITED FUNDone grant, 2024 · $50k
- JUJEWISH UNITED FUNDone grant, 2021 · $36k
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.
A better chicago is changing how chicago fights poverty by investing in bold ideas that create opportunity for our youth.
Live Free Illinois is a statewide organization partnering with over 120 congregations and directly impacted individuals to build safer more equitable communities across Illinois. Operating at the intersection of criminal justice reform and…
Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.
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…
The Network is a group of 40+ member organizations dedicated to improving the lives of those impacted by gender-based violence through education, public policy and advocacy, and connecting community members with direct service providers.…
The Chicago Refugee Coalition is a 501c3 non-profit organization dedicated ot the alleviation of human suffering through innovative partnerships, advocacy and community empowerment.
Alternatives, inc.'s mission is to facilitate personal development,strengthen family relationships and enhance the community's well being. serving over 3,000 youth and families annually, the organization offers a range of counseling and…
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…
One for one chicago provides paid work-based learning, mentorship, and career readiness support for young people ages 1524 in chicago communities with high rates of unemployment and limited access to early work experience.
Thrive chicago's mission is to prepare chicago's youth for a vibrant future by aligning efforts and outcomes from cradle to career.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Connections for the Homeless Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Roberti Community House. 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 23 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
105 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. 105 of the 356 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds Highland Park Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
- Who funds Spark Ventures ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH SUBURBAN LEGAL AID CLINIC ↗
- Who funds CANCER WELLNESS CENTER ↗
- Who funds FACING FORWARD TO END HOMELESSNESS ↗
- Who funds THE LAKE COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Erie Family Health Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds Institute for Nonviolence Chicago ↗
- Who funds EVANSTON SCHOLARS ↗
- Who funds Mothers Trust Foundation ↗
- Who funds Michael Rolfe Pancreatic Cancer Foundation ↗
- Who funds Gratitude Generation Inc ↗
- Who funds STRIDES FOR PEACE INC ↗
- Who funds BERNIE'S BOOK BANK ↗
- Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
- Who funds The Roberti Community House ↗
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: The Chicago Community Trust · Circle of Service Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · Highland Park Community Foundation · Robert R McCormick Foundation · The Joyce Foundation · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · First Bank Chicago Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · Polk Bros Foundation Inc · John and Kathleen Schreiber Foundation D/B/A Schreiber Philanthropy
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 Leva Family 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Cradles to Crayons Inc — 2% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 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 Leva Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Leva Family 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.