Skip to content

· Private foundation

Peter & Penelope West Charitable Fund

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.

$1.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$750k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Arts & Culture$1.0MHealth$231kEducation$114kEmployment$49kFood & Nutrition$29kHuman Services$18kEnvironment$11k
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k10 grants · $211k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $233k
  • $250k+1 grant · $750k
$40,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$5k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RAGDALE FOUNDATION$750,000
BENJAMIN'S HOPE$130,000
ACOR$52,500
STATELINE DOWN SYNDROME FOUNDATION$50,000
ZION DEVELOPMENT$40,000
PROJECT ONWARD$40,000
MARYLAND INSTITUTE COLLEGE OF ART$40,000
FENIX FAMILY HEALTH CENTER$30,000
HOLLAND MUSEUM$11,000
ROSECRANCE FOUNDATION$10,000
BEACON PLACE$10,000
FRIENDS OF PALMETTO BLUFF CONSERVANCY$10,000
LAKE FOREST PRESERVATION FOUNDATION$10,000
NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK$10,000
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 (FY21–24, $151k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BENJAMIN'S HOPE: $130k → 10%BENJAMIN'S HOPE: $5k → 10%BENJAMIN'S HOPE: $3k → 10%BENJAMIN'S HOPE: $3k → 10%BEACON PLACE: $10k → 8%BEACON PLACE: $1k → 8%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.
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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 18 repeat orgs$70k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +47% since the first grant, against +5% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
3

Total granted

$1.4M
$70k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+5%

Still filing today

67%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $70k 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
Arts & CultureEmploymentHuman ServicesEducationHealthPhilanthropyOther
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

  • RF
    Ragdale Foundation
    8× · 2017–2024 · $928k · revenue +117% · 38% of their budget
  • BH
    BENJAMIN'S HOPE
    4× · 2021–2024 · $140k · revenue +67%
  • PO
    PROJECT ONWARD
    8× · 2017–2024 · $47k · revenue +19%

Funded once

  • SD
    STATELINE DOWN SYNDROME FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $50k
  • RF
    ROSECRANCE FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue -41%
  • NI
    NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +5%
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
Museum of Arts and Design

To collect, display and interpret objects in craft art and design.

Arts & Culture
2
Rimland Services Nfp

Provide community-based residential housing to adults with autism and/or severe developmental disabilities. also provide developmental training and other supports to this same population.

Human Services
3
Detroit Historical Society

The Detroit Historical Society tells Detroit's stories and why they matter through its exhibits, programs, outreach, and the preservation and dissemination of its artifacts and collections.

Arts & Culture
4
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health

Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…

Health
5
Design Museum of Chicago

The Design Museum of Chicago strives to inspire, educate and innovate through design. As a resource for the Chicago design community and beyond, the museum facilitates an open dialogue about contemporary and historical design through…

Arts & Culture
6
Cedille Chicago Nfp

Cedille Chicago, NFP is devoted to the activity of producing and marketing recordings of classical music by Chicago-area musicians and composers.

Arts & Culture
7
The Richard H Driehaus Museum

The driehaus museum engages and inspires the global community through exploration and ongoing conversations in art, architecture, and design of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. its permanent collection and temporary…

Arts & Culture
8
The Rose House

The Rose House helps adults with developmental disabilities pursue full, active lives by providing them and their families with: 1) Innovative choices for living and learning - 2) Opportunities for independent living to the full extent of…

Human Services
9
Illinois Presbyterian Home

Operate homes for the aged and to conduct charitable and benevolent enterprises

Human Services
10
Lincoln Behavioral Services

To provide comprehensive outpatient mental health services to over 5400 individuals and their families in a consumer driven person centered delivery system. Approximately 15% of our staff members are our clients who are involved in a…

Health
11
Goodwill Industries of Northern Il and Wi Stateline Area Inc

The mission of goodwill is to create opportunities for individuals with barriers to enhance their lives. barriers include physical or mental disabilities, lack of education and job preparation, socio-economic disadvantages, and others.…

—
12
Chicago Psychoanalytic Institute

The chicago psychoanalytic institute transforms the lives of individuals, families and communities, using psychoanalytic knowledge to help them grow and thrive.

Social Science
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rosecrance Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Lake Forest Foundation for Historic Preservation. 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

14 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 14 of the 21 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
11/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Ragdale Foundation: $927,700 · Arts & CultureRagdale Foundation+2 more: $25,000 · Arts & CultureACOR: $70,000 · OtherACORSTATELINE DOWN SYNDROME FOUNDATION: $50,000 · OtherSTATELINE DO…LAKE FOREST FOUNDATION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION: $12,000 · OtherLAKE FOREST …FRIENDS OF PALMETTO BLUFF CONSERVANCY: $11,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF P…ROSECRANCE INC: $7,000 · Other+4 more: $12,000 · Other+4 moreBENJAMIN'S HOPE: $140,000 · Human ServicesBENJAMIN'S …The Beacon Place NFP: $11,000 · Human ServicesThe Beacon …ZION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $49,000 · EmploymentPROJECT ONWARD: $47,000 · EmploymentTHE LAMBS FARM INC: $15,000 · EmploymentMaryland Institute: $44,000 · EducationFenix Family Health Center: $31,400 · HealthROSECRANCE FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · PhilanthropyNORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK: $10,000 · Food & Nutrition
Arts & Culture$952,700Other$162,000Human Services$151,000Employment$111,000Education$44,000Health$31,400Philanthropy$10,000Food & Nutrition$10,000

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 budgetRagdale Foundation: $927,700 over 8y, 38% of budgetBENJAMIN'S HOPE: $140,000 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetZION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $49,000 over 8y, 4.3% of budgetPROJECT ONWARD: $47,000 over 8y, 7.4% of budgetMaryland Institute: $44,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFenix Family Health Center: $31,400 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetTHE LAMBS FARM INC: $15,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetHOLLAND MUSEUM: $14,000 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetLAKE FOREST FOUNDATION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION: $12,000 over 3y, 6.1% of budgetThe Beacon Place NFP: $11,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetChicago Symphony Orchestra: $11,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetROSECRANCE FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetROSECRANCE INC: $7,000 over 7y, 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.

  • Who funds Ragdale Foundation ↗
  • Who funds BENJAMIN'S HOPE ↗
  • Who funds ZION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT ONWARD ↗
  • Who funds Maryland Institute ↗
  • Who funds Fenix Family Health Center ↗
  • Who funds THE LAMBS FARM INC ↗
  • Who funds HOLLAND MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds LAKE FOREST FOUNDATION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION ↗
  • Who funds The Beacon Place NFP ↗
  • Who funds Chicago Symphony Orchestra ↗
  • Who funds ROSECRANCE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds ROSECRANCE INC ↗

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 TrustIL15× affinity6 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · John and Kathleen Schreiber Foundation D/B/A Schreiber Philanthropy · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Peter & Penelope West Charitable Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Peter & Penelope West Charitable Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 & Penelope West Charitable Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Peter & Penelope West Charitable Fund 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 21 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 & Penelope West’s filings →

    More from the funding graph