· Private foundation
Patricia and David Schulte Foundation Inc
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 FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RYAN LICHT SANG BIPOLAR FOUNDATION INC | $3,250 |
| JEWISH UNITED FUND | $3,000 |
| TRUSTEES OF PHILLIPS ACADEMY | $1,000 |
| YALE UNIVERSITY | $1,000 |
| CENTER FOR INDEPENDENCE | $1,000 |
| CHICAGO SHAKESPEARE THEATER | $1,000 |
| THE GOOD INFORMATION FOUNDATION | $500 |
| NEW SKETE MONASTERIES INC | $500 |
| AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS | $500 |
| EAGLEBROOK SCHOOL | $500 |
| PAWS FOR PURPLE HEARTS | $250 |
| WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC | $100 |
| SPECIAL OLYMPICS ILLINOIS | $100 |
| MAKE-A-WISH ILLINOIS | $100 |
| SMART LOVE FAMILY SERVICES | $100 |
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 (FY21–24, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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 +30% since the first grant, against +6% for the ones you funded once.
26 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 2 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, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $600 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
- TRTHE RYAN LICHT SANG BIPOLAR FOUNDATION INC5× · 2019–2024 · $15k · revenue +30%
Williams College5× · 2019–2024 · $10k · revenue +13%- JUJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO4× · 2019–2024 · $8k · revenue +57%
Funded once
- PFPARTNERS FOR JUSTICE INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue +871%
- HRHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INCone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue -9%
- UUMCORone grant, 2022 · $4k
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.
The chicago public education fund (the fund) is a nonprofit organization that improves public schools in chicago by investing in the talented educators who lead them.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
The organization's mission is to educate students for creative occupations in diverse fields of arts and media.
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,…
The team at kipp chicago schools is guided by a simple, yet powerful mission: to create a network of excellent schools in chicago that teach our students the character and academic skills necessary to succeed in college and beyond, and to…
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
Saint xavier university, a catholic institution inspired by the heritage of the sisters of mercy, educates persons to search for truth, think critically, communicate effectively and serve wisely and compassionately in support of human…
The mission of south shore charter school is to cultivate students the tenacity, integrity, and curiosity needed to become innovative and socially responsible leaders, ready to face and solve the ever-changing challenges facing our…
The mission of intrinsic schools is to create a revolutionary new school model in order to 1) prepare all students for postsecondary success and world-changing endeavors; and 2) provide the education community with a roadmap to sustainable…
Smith college educates women of promise for lives of distinction and purpose. a college of and for the world, smith college links the power of the liberal arts to excellence in research and scholarship, developing leaders for society's…
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
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 American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. 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 48 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
34 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. 34 of the 48 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 PARTNERS FOR JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds THE RYAN LICHT SANG BIPOLAR FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO SHAKESPEARE THEATER ↗
- Who funds Williams College ↗
- Who funds JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds Center for Independence through Conductive Education Inc ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF PHILLIPS ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds ALLEN-CHASE FOUNDATION DBA EAGLEBROOK SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO CITY DAY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
- Who funds LITWORLD INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY GREATER NY & CT INC ↗
- Who funds V G C FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FEAST Inc ↗
- Who funds NUEVA SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Mary Meyer School ↗
- Who funds MISSION EURASIA ↗
- Who funds PAWS FOR PURPLE HEARTS ↗
- Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds COAST GUARD FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds COVENANT HOUSE ↗
- Who funds TAMID ISRAEL INVESTMENT GROUP LTD ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗
- Who funds CHRISTOPHER HOUSE ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS ILLINOIS ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association 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.
Open a dossier: AbbVie Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · National Philanthropic Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Endowment Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving 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 organization Patricia and David Schulte Foundation Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
- Williams College — 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.