Skip to content
Peter & Paula Fasseas Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Peter & Paula Fasseas 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.

$2.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
8
States reached
$2.7M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Animals$13MEducation$1.7MHealth$311kHousing & Shelter$124kReligion$105kCommunity Improvement$102kYouth Development$50kArts & Culture$33kOther$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $143k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
  • $250k+1 grant · $2.7M
$10,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$49M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PAWS CHICAGO$2,661,280
CULVER ACADEMIES$50,000
LURIE CANCER CENTER$50,000
BIG DOG RANCH RESCUE$35,000
WINGS PROGRAM INC$34,000
TUCSON WILDLIFE CENTER$28,000
ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN LAITY$15,000
CHICAGO CITY DAY SCHOOL$11,400
ABOVE AND BEYOND FAMILY RECOVERY CENTER FOUNDATION$10,000
UNCONDITIONAL RESCUE$10,000
BETTER GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION$5,000
CHURCH OF THE HOLY FAMILY$5,000
ANNUNCIATION & ST PARASKEVI GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH$3,000
WTTW$2,508
AUSTIN PETS ALIVE$2,500
02The need
03

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 (FY19–21, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%LET IT BE US: $3k → 14%HELLENIC FOUNDATION: $17k → 14%HELLENIC FOUNDATION: $3k → 14%HELLENIC FOUNDATION: $3k → 14%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

WA
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
WY
IN
CT
CA
CO
VA
DE
AZ
AR
TN
DC
HI
AL
GA
TX
FL
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$16M · 30 repeat orgs$450k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +34% since the first grant, against +24% for those funded once.

30 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

30
56

Total granted

$16M
$412k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
+24%

Still filing today

73%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $38k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
AnimalsEducationHealthHousing & ShelterArts & CultureHuman ServicesOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • PC
    PAWS CHICAGO
    6× · 2019–2024 · $13M · revenue +151%
  • Culver Educational Foundation
    5× · 2019–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +39%
  • CC
    CHICAGO CITY DAY SCHOOL
    3× · 2019–2024 · $374k · revenue +48%

Funded once

  • JP
    JAMES P SFARNAS HELLENIC STUDIES SCHOLARSHIP ENDOWMENT
    one grant, 2022 · $75k
  • ASSISTANCE DOGS OF HAWAII
    one grant, 2023 · $30k · revenue -24%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO CANCER RESEARCH
    one grant, 2019 · $25k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its 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
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
2
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
3
Hinsdale Humane Society

To prevent animal suffering and neglect throughout our community and beyond, and to ensure that all animals in shelters and homes are well cared for and treated with compassion.

Animals
4
The Anti-Cruelty Society

Anti-Cruelty is a private, nonprofit organization which was established in 1899 and is chartered in Illinois. Anti-Cruelty builds a healthy and happy community where pets and people thrive together.

Animals
5
Wags 2 Wishes Animal Rescue

Our mission is to rescue abused, sick, abandoned and forgotten animals facing euthanasia and provide a loving and secure transition into our rescue program. most animals are rescued from kill shelters in illinois and surrounding states.

Animals
6
Wisconsin Humane Society

The mission of the Wisconsin Humane Society is to make a difference for animals and the people who love them.

Animals
7
Pet Animal Welfare Society of Connecticut Inc

Pet animal welfare society of ct (paws), established in 1962, is a no-kill animal rescue shelter dedicated to the rescue and adoption of our community's homeless and abused dogs and cats. paws efforts are focused on three critical needs:…

Animals
8
Progressive Animal Welfare Society aka Paws

A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.

Animals
9
Humane Society of Central Illinois

HSCIs mission is to find loving, forever homes for abused and unwanted pets.

Animals
10
Illinois Animal Welfare Networkers Association
Animals
11
Utah Animal Adoption Center

The organization is dedicated to reducing pet overpopulation, eliminating euthanasia as a means of controlling pet overpopulation, and preventing animal suffering in utah.

Animals
12
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Big Dog Ranch Rescue Inc; the most unlike its peers is Westmoreland County Public School Scholarship Fund. 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

58 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. 58 of the 91 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
13
Early backer (in before they grew)
57/58
Grantees still filing
41/58
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PAWS CHICAGO: $13,067,865 · AnimalsPAWS CHICAGO+19 more: $290,500 · AnimalsCulver Educational Foundation: $1,130,000 · EducationCulver Educ…CHICAGO CITY DAY SCHOOL: $374,400 · EducationCHICAGO CIT…University of Arizona Foundation: $75,000 · EducationUniversity of Chicago: $62,500 · Education+3 more: $7,850 · EducationCITY OF HOPE: $100,000 · OtherLURIE CANCER CENTER: $100,000 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $100,000 · OtherJAMES P SFARNAS HELLENIC STUDIES SCHOLARSHIP ENDOWMENT: $75,000 · OtherANNUNCIATION & ST PARASKEVI GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH: $38,710 · OtherOrthodox Christian Laity: $36,000 · Other+46 more: $315,755 · OtherWINGS PROGRAM INC: $122,500 · Housing & ShelterLESTER AND ROSALIE ANIXTER CENTER: $7,500 · Housing & Shelter+1 more: $1,000 · Housing & ShelterBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF CHICAGO: $50,000 · Youth DevelopmentLOOKINGGLASS THEATRE COMPANY: $15,000 · Arts & CultureLyric Opera of Chicago: $15,000 · Arts & CultureWINDOW TO THE WORLD COMMUNICATIONS INC: $2,508 · Arts & CultureTHE H FOUNDATION: $10,100 · HealthCANINE THERAPY CORPS INC: $10,000 · HealthHIPPOCRATIC CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · HealthALS UNITED GREATER CHICAGO: $1,530 · Health+1 more: $150 · Health
Animals$13,358,365Education$1,649,750Other$765,465Housing & Shelter$131,000Youth Development$50,000Arts & Culture$32,508Health$26,780

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

25%50%75%100%$10k$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPAWS CHICAGO: $13,067,865 over 6y, 13% of budgetCulver Educational Foundation: $1,130,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetCHICAGO CITY DAY SCHOOL: $374,400 over 3y, 6.2% of budgetWINGS PROGRAM INC: $122,500 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $75,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Chicago: $62,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF CHICAGO: $50,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetBIG DOG RANCH RESCUE INC: $40,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetOrthodox Christian Laity: $36,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetASSISTANCE DOGS OF HAWAII: $30,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTucson Wildlife Center Inc: $28,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetNalas New Life Rescue Inc: $25,000 over 2y, 6.9% of budgetCHEROKEE COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY: $25,000 over 2y, 6.9% of budgetUNCONDITIONAL INC: $25,000 over 2y, 5.2% of budgetHellenic Foundation: $22,750 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetFRIENDS OF CHICAGO ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL: $20,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetLOOKINGGLASS THEATRE COMPANY: $15,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetRESCUED PETS MOVEMENT INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetALBERTS DOG LOUNGE: $15,000 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetLyric Opera of Chicago: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF SHELBY COUNTY: $15,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetYMCA FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA: $12,500 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetTHE H FOUNDATION: $10,100 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCANINE THERAPY CORPS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetTHE INNER SCIENCES FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 29% of budgetGARRIDO STRAY RESCUE FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetGIVE TO RESEARCH: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSOCIAL COMPASSION IN LEGISLATION: $10,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetNorthwestern University: $7,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLESTER AND ROSALIE ANIXTER CENTER: $7,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBETTER GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION INC: $7,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetUATX: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAWS - PROVIDING ANIMAL WELFARE SERVICES: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAUSTIN PETS ALIVE INC: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHARLIE'S ANGELS SAVING ANIMALS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetHighland Park Community Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAnimal Zone International Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetHIPPOCRATIC CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetLOKAA FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 9.1% of budgetNOURISHING HOPE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE GREATER BIRMINGHAM HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWINDOW TO THE WORLD COMMUNICATIONS INC: $2,508 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHAROLD E EISENBERG FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLET IT BE US: $2,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMICI CANNIS: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetALS UNITED GREATER CHICAGO: $1,530 over 2y, 0.1% 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.

The Chicago Community…Petsmart Charities IncTully Family Foundati…AbbVie FoundationThe Service Club of C…Circle of Service Fou…Best Friends Animal S…Jewish Federation of …Greater Good CharitiesChubb Charitable Foun…The Ayco Charitable F…Greater Houston Commu…
The Chicago Community TrustIL19× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · Petsmart Charities Inc · Tully Family Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · The Service Club of Chicago · Circle of Service Foundation · Best Friends Animal Society · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Greater Good Charities · Chubb Charitable Foundation · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · Greater Houston Community 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 Peter & Paula Fasseas Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Peter & Paula Fasseas Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Shatterproof a Nonprofit Corporation: 2% of income from government
  • Big Dog Ranch Rescue Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
13report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Peter & Paula Fasseas Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Peter & Paula Fasseas 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.

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 91 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Peter & Paula Fasseas’ filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home