Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Metropolitan Mayors Caucus

The caucus provides a forum through which the chief elected officials of the region cooperatively develop consensus on common public policy issues and multi-jurisdictional challenges.

$34M
Granted FY2024still arriving
27
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$30M
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Public Benefit$31MEnvironment$5.1MHuman Services$1.3MArts & Culture$924kPublic Safety & Disaster$773kRecreation & Sports$243kHousing & Shelter$175kCivil Rights$139kOther$0
02FY2024 · 27 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k6 grants · $46k
  • $10k–50k14 grants · $190k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $362k
  • $250k+5 grants · $33M
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF CHICAGO$30,251,235
VILLAGE OF OAK PARK$1,062,545
LAKE COUNTY$923,990
CITY OF ELGIN$737,237
VILLAGE OF FORD HEIGHTS$257,545
VILLAGE OF UNIVERSITY PARK$223,022
CITY OF URBANA$138,897
OPTICOS DESIGN INC$25,333
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS$25,000
CHICAGO METROPOLITAN AGENCY FOR PLANNING$20,103
METROPOLITAN PLANNING COUNCIL$15,000
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE$15,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
PARK FOREST FIRE DEPARTMENT$10,000
VILLAGE OF ELMWOOD PARK$10,000
02The need
03

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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 96% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%OPTICOS DESIGN INC: $25k → 10%CITY OF WOODSTOCK: $10k → 6%VILLAGE OF BENSENVILLE: $10k → 7%BOLINGBROOK POLICE DEPARTMENT: $10k → 7%VILLAGE OF ELBURN: $10k → 8%UNITED WAY OF LAKE COUNTY: $10k → 8%CITY OF DEKALB: $11k → 13%GERMAN VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT: $10k → 14%CITY OF ROCKFORD: $10k → 15%CITY OF URBANA: $139k → 19%FOX METRO WATER RECLAMATION DISTRICT: $10k → 6%VILLAGE OF CRETE: $10k → 7%LAKE COUNTY: $924k → 8%VILLAGE OF LIBERTYVILLE: $10k → 8%CITY OF CHICAGO: $30.3M → 14%CITY OF JOLIET: $10k → 7%VILLAGE OF HAWTHORN WOODS: $13k → 8%VILLAGE OF RICHMOND: $10k → 6%VILLAGE OF LOMBARD: $10k → 7%CITY OF HARVEY FIRE DEPARTMENT: $12k → 14%CITY OF DARIEN: $10k → 7%Metropolitan Planning Council: $88k → 14%METROPOLITAN PLANNING COUNCIL: $34k → 14%VILLAGE OF MONEE: $10k → 7%METROPOLITAN PLANNING COUNCIL: $15k → 14%VILLAGE OF MOKENA: $10k → 7%CITY OF HICKORY HILLS: $10k → 14%Village of Cary: $10k → 6%VILLAGE OF WHEELING: $10k → 14%METROPOLITAN PLANNING COUNCIL: $14k → 14%VILLAGE OF GLENCOE: $10k → 14%City of Oak Forest: $10k → 14%VILLAGE OF BROADVIEW: $10k → 14%VILLAGE OF RIVERSIDE: $10k → 14%VILLAGE OF UNIVERSITY PARK: $223k → 14%PARK FOREST FIRE DEPARTMENT: $10k → 14%VILLAGE OF MOUNT PROSPECT: $10k → 14%VILLAGE OF ELMWOOD PARK: $10k → 14%Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning: $135k → 14%CHICAGO METROPOLITAN AGENCY FOR PLANNING: $83k → 14%CHICAGO METROPOLITAN AGENCY FOR PLANNING: $20k → 14%CITY OF ELGIN: $737k → 14%VILLAGE OF FORD HEIGHTS: $258k → 14%THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO: $10k → 14%CHICAGO METROPOLITAN AGENCY FOR PLANNING: $79k → 14%CHICAGO METROPOLITAN AGENCY FOR PLANNING: $26k → 14%ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE: $15k → 14%VILLAGE OF OAK PARK: $1.1M → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein 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 — 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.

6%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.3M · 24 repeat orgs$38M to everyone else

24 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 22 since wound down; 25 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
131

Total granted

$2.3M
$4.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+6%
+62%

Still filing today

4%
2%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 2% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Community ImprovementPublic Safety & DisasterPhilanthropyOther

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

  • CO
    CITY OF ELGIN
    2× · 2019–2024 · $747k
  • CM
    Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning
    4× · 2019–2022 · $322k
  • VO
    Village of River Forest
    2× · 2017–2022 · $182k

Funded once

  • WA
    West Aurora School District 129
    one grant, 2017 · $580k
  • GT
    Glenbard Township High School District 87
    one grant, 2017 · $345k
  • EU
    EMORY UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2017 · $324k

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.

1
Latino Union of Chicago

Latino Union works to defend the rights and dignity of contingent workers, including the right to immigrate, work, live free of oppression and violence, and provide for oneself and one's family.

Human Services
2
Illinois Migrant Council

English language individuals and other disdvantaged minorities to achieve economic self sufficiency.

Human Services
3
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
4
Chicago Refugee Coalition

The Chicago Refugee Coalition is a 501c3 non-profit organization dedicated ot the alleviation of human suffering through innovative partnerships, advocacy and community empowerment.

Human Services
5
Illinois Community for Displaced Immigrants

Serving recently arrived migrants and asylum seekers in the Chicagoland area and is committed to upholding the dignity and human rights of immigrants.

Human Services
6
Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights

To promote the full and equal participation of immigrants and refugees in the political, civic, cultural, and social life of our diverse society.

Civil Rights
7
Chicagoland Immigrant Welcome Network

The welcome network exists to caringly provide practical resources, spiritual mentoring, and real community to internationally-born residents of northwest indiana and south chicago.

Religion
8
Illinois Unidos

Champion equitable responses and recovery efforts for the Latinx community impacted by COVID-19

Community Improvement
9
Fenix Family Health Center

To provide low or no cost medical care to low income and uninsured people.

Health
10
North Suburban Legal Aid Clinic

North suburban legal aid clinic's mission is to provide accessible, quality, equitable, free legal services in the areas of domestic violence, housing, and immigration to give low-income, at-risk community members access to justice and the…

Crime & Legal
11
Executive Service Corps of Chicago

Executive Service Corps is the premier nonprofit consultancy that engages highly skilled professionals who use their experience and expertise to provide nonprofits with the consulting services they need to be successful. Our vision is to…

Community Improvement
12
Chicago United for Equity

Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.

Civil Rights

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Immigration Project Inc and the most unlike its peers is Claude and Marilyn Boles 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.

04the grantee network

5 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 5 of the 180 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/5
Grantees still filing
3/5
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CITY OF CHICAGO — $30,251,235 · OtherCITY OF CHICAGO+176 more — $9,424,157 · Other+176 moreMETROPOLITAN PLANNING COUNCIL — $151,000 · Community ImprovementUNITED WAY OF LAKE COUNTY INC — $10,000 · PhilanthropyForest Lake Fire Dept Relief Assn — $5,369 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$39,675,392Community Improvement$151,000Philanthropy$10,000Public Safety & Disaster$5,369

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMETROPOLITAN PLANNING COUNCIL — $151,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetACTIVE TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE — $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetUNITED WAY OF LAKE COUNTY INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetForest Lake Fire Dept Relief Assn — $5,369 over 1y, 1.6% of budget
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 METROPOLITAN PLANNING COUNCIL
  • Who funds Claude and Marilyn Boles Foundation Inc

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.

OpenlandsIL77.5× affinity36 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Openlands · The Morton Arboretum · Illinois Clean Energy Community Foundation · Ageoptions Inc (Fka Suburban Area Agency on Aging) · Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Inc · The Dupage Community Foundation · Greater Chicago Food Depository · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · AARP · The Chicago Community Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Metropolitan Mayors Caucus 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.

2023
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 180 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph