Skip to content

· Private foundation

Shore Capital Charitable 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.

$17k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it funds
0164% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Housing & Shelter$181kHealth$174kAnimals$156kCommunity Improvement$150kYouth Development$93kFood & Nutrition$17kRecreation & Sports$3kHuman Services$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,500
Median grant
4
States reached
$63k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE LAM FOUNDATION$3,000
AMERICA SCORES CHICAGO$3,000
PILOT LIGHT$1,500
THE NOVI COMMUNITY$1,500
JUVENILE PROTECTIVE ASSOCAITAION$1,500
Individual grant recipient$1,500
OPEN HEART MAGIC$1,500
THE UNIFORM FUNDING FOUNDATION$1,500
PAWS CHICAGO$1,000
HIGHWIND IMPACT FUND INC$625
PEDAL THE CAUSE$100
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 (FY25–25, $3k) 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%PEDAL THE CAUSE: $100 → 11%JUVENILE PROTECTIVE ASSOCAITAION: $2k → 14%OPEN HEART MAGIC: $2k → 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
MN
IL
WI
MI
OR
OH
CT
CA
CO
MO
MD
TN
LA
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 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
A Better Chicago

A better chicago is changing how chicago fights poverty by investing in bold ideas that create opportunity for our youth.

Human Services
2
Children's Advocates for Change

Children's advocates for change was organized to improve the lives of children in illinois by bringing about significant changes public policies and programs for children through research, policy analysis and advocacy, public education and…

Human Services
3
Thrive Chicago Nfp

Thrive chicago's mission is to prepare chicago's youth for a vibrant future by aligning efforts and outcomes from cradle to career.

Human Services
4
Intentional Sports

Intentional Sports is a nonprofit organization that stands committed to inspiring Chicago's youth through the power of sports. Our mission is to provide accessible opportunities in sports, wellness, and education through programming that…

Recreation & Sports
5
Junior Achievement of Chicago

To inspire and prepare young people to succeed in a global economy

International
6
Chicago City Soccer Club

Chicago city soccer club is committed to providing opportunities for young people in the city of chicago, illinois to learn and play soccer in a healthy and positive environment, and to guiding chicago youth soccer players in the…

Recreation & Sports
7
Advocates for Illinois Children

Improve the lives of children in illinois by bringing about significant changes in public policies and programs for children through research, policy analysis and advocacy, public education and community outreach.

Human Services
8
Junior Chefs of America Inc

At Junior Chefs of America, we help fight hunger and food insecurities through 5 culinary programs geared for ages 4-18 years old. Through these programs we teach in four areas that foster healthy eating environments for all students. Our…

Community Improvement
9
Chicago Children's Museum

Chicago childrens museum is a place where families and caregivers with infants and children are encouraged to create, explore, and discover together through play. the museum features three vibrant floors of exhibits and activities that…

Arts & Culture
10
Kipp Chicago Schools

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…

Education
11
Star Farm Chicago

Star farm chicago is an urban farm in the back of the yards neighborhood that seeks to increase accessibility and of locally grown organic produce through affordable farm stands, csas, year-round farmers markets participation, food…

—
12
Plant Chicago Nfp

Plant Chicago's mission is to cultivate local circular economies. We envision a paradigm shift in production, consumption, and waste driven at the local level, generating equity and economic opportunity for all residents.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Highwind Impact Fund Inc; the most unlike its peers is Uniform Funding Foundation. 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

12 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. 12 of the 39 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
4/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MISSION VETERINARY PARTNERS: $105,100 · OtherMISSION VETERINARY PARTNERSIndividual grant recipient: $96,750 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $76,900 · OtherIndividual grant recipientBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS: $60,000 · OtherBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERSGREAT LAKES DENTAL PARTNERS: $47,000 · OtherGREAT LAKES DENTAL PARTNERSIndividual grant recipient: $38,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $33,910 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $32,350 · OtherGOLDEN BEAR THERAPY PARTNERS: $31,500 · OtherZAC PLANTZ FOUNDATION: $30,000 · OtherNOVA HEALTH: $28,600 · OtherSENTA ENT & ALLERGY PHYSICIANS: $28,050 · Other+16 more: $189,221 · Other+16 moreBIGGER TABLE: $150,000 · Food & NutritionBIGGER TABLEMEALS ON WHEELS CHICAGO: $15,000 · Food & NutritionMEALS ON WHEELS CH…CONNECTICUT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYINC: $50,000 · Animals+1 more: $1,000 · AnimalsJUVENILE PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION: $1,500 · Human ServicesOPEN HEART MAGIC: $1,500 · Human Services+1 more: $100 · Human ServicesNOVI COMMUNITY: $1,500 · InternationalUNIFORM FUNDING FOUNDATION: $1,500 · Youth DevelopmentPILOT LIGHT: $1,500 · HealthHIGHWIND IMPACT FUND INC: $625 · Philanthropy
Other$797,881Food & Nutrition$165,000Animals$51,000Human Services$3,100International$1,500Youth Development$1,500Health$1,500Philanthropy$625

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBIGGER TABLE: $150,000 over 2y, 24% of budgetCONNECTICUT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYINC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS CHICAGO: $15,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetAmerica SCORES Chicago: $3,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetUNIFORM FUNDING FOUNDATION: $1,500 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetPILOT LIGHT: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJUVENILE PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOPEN HEART MAGIC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHIGHWIND IMPACT FUND INC: $625 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetPEDAL THE CAUSE: $100 over 1y, 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 BIGGER TABLE ↗
  • Who funds CONNECTICUT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYINC ↗
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds America SCORES Chicago ↗
  • Who funds NOVI COMMUNITY ↗
  • Who funds UNIFORM FUNDING FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds PILOT LIGHT ↗
  • Who funds JUVENILE PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds OPEN HEART MAGIC ↗
  • Who funds PAWS CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds HIGHWIND IMPACT FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds PEDAL THE CAUSE ↗

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.

AbbVie FoundationIL12× affinity4 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: AbbVie Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Shore Capital Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Shore Capital Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%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 · 0–30%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Shore Capital Charitable Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Shore Capital Charitable 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 39 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Shore Capital’s filings →

    More from the funding graph