· Public charity
Shriver Center on Poverty Law
The SHRIVER CENTER ON POVERTY LAW (the shriver center) is an illinois not-for-profit corporation that fights for racial and economic justice by advancing laws and policies that change people's lives.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 8 grants below total $216,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $225,489 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $8,989 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k6 grants · $44k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $30k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $143k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FAMILIES USA FOUNDATION INC | $142,500 |
| CHICAGO APPLESEED FUND FOR JUSTICE | $30,000 |
| HOUSING CHOICE PARTNERS | $7,500 |
| CHICAGO AREA FAIR HOUSING ALLIANCE | $7,500 |
| HOUSING ACTION ILLINOIS | $7,500 |
| HOPE FAIR HOUSING CENTER | $7,500 |
| CHICAGO COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS | $7,500 |
| ILLINOIS PRIMARY HEALTHCARE ASSOCIATION | $6,500 |
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 (FY20–24, $398k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 94% 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 +56% since the first grant, against +29% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 1 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, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k 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
- FUFAMILIES USA FOUNDATION INC3× · 2022–2024 · $375k · revenue +31%
- EIEVERTHRIVE ILLINOIS6× · 2017–2023 · $265k · revenue +57%
- ICILLINOIS COALITION FOR IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS4× · 2020–2023 · $227k · revenue +239%
Funded once
- AMALIVIO MEDICAL CENTER INCone grant, 2022 · $40k · revenue -8%
- AFAIDS Foundation of Chicagoone grant, 2023 · $30k · revenue +16%
- SCSOUTH CAROLINA APPLESEED LEGAL JUSTICE CENTERone grant, 2020 · $30k · revenue -39%
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.
Secure racial equity and economic opportunity for all
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…
Work with DC courts, private bar & legal services providers to increase legal representations for low & moderate income DC residents, enhance efficiency of legal services, and reduce barriers to the judicial system.
Standing with our neighbors, Lakeshore Legal Aid fights poverty and injustice through advocacy and by providing meaningful and dignified access to the legal system.
To advance the safety, independence, and economic stability of those most affected by poverty, racism, and other structurally oppressive systems by increasing access to justice and working for systemic solutions.
In 2024, Inner City Law Center, ICLC, served over 3,400 people, helping vulnerable Angelenos to remain in their homes and recover nearly $20.5 million in financial benefits.
Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.
The Equal Justice Center is a non-profit law firm and employment justice organization which empowers low-income families, workers, and communities to achieve fair treatment in the workplace, in the justice system, and in our shared society…
Legal aid's mission is to 'make justice real' - in individual and systemic ways - for persons living in poverty in the district of columbia. in particular, legal aid provides civil legal assistance to individuals, families, and communities…
To promote the rights of renters to safe, accessible, and affordable housing on a non-discriminatory basis through education, outreach, supportive services, advocacy, and legal representation.
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.
As one of the most enduring civil rights institutions on the West Coast, we work to dismantle systems of oppression and racism, and build an equitable and just society.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Mexico Center On Law and Poverty and the most unlike its peers is Greater Dayton Union Cooperative Initiative Inc. 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 37 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
41 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. 41 of the 43 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 FAMILIES USA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds EVERTHRIVE ILLINOIS ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS COALITION FOR IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds Legal Council for Health Justice ↗
- Who funds Fund for Justice ↗
- Who funds Texas Appleseed ↗
- Who funds NEW MEXICO CENTER ON LAW AND POVERTY ↗
- Who funds OFFICE OF KENTUCKY LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAMS INC ↗
- Who funds Maine Equal Justice Partners ↗
- Who funds NORTH CAROLINA JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO AREA FAIR HOUSING ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds ALIVIO MEDICAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Heartland Alliance for Human Needs and Rights ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO COALITION TO END HOMELESSNESS ↗
- Who funds COLUMBIA LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds AIDS Foundation of Chicago ↗
- Who funds SOUTH CAROLINA APPLESEED LEGAL JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
- Who funds Housing Action Illinois ↗
- Who funds LATINO POLICY FORUM ↗
- Who funds DUPAGE FEDERATION ON HUMAN SERVICES REFORM ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE OF JOLIET ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID OF SOUTHEAST AND CENTRAL OHIO ↗
- Who funds HOPE FAIR HOUSING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Citizen Action Illinois ↗
- Who funds HCP OF ILLINOIS INC ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds 482 FORWARD ↗
- Who funds SMALL BUSINESS ADVOCACY COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds Genesee County Legal Aid Society DBA Center for Civil Justice ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA APPLESEED INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER DAYTON UNION COOPERATIVE INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR INTERCULTURAL ORGANIZING ↗
- Who funds Illinois Primary Health Care Association ↗
- Who funds EMPIRE JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds Kansas Appleseed Center for Law and Justice Inc ↗
- Who funds MISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICE ↗
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: New Venture Fund · MAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger · The Chicago Community Trust · National Health Law Program Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · Michael Reese Health Trust · WK Kellogg Foundation · Equal Justice Works · Field Foundation of Illinois · The Ford Foundation · Center for Law and Social Policy
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 Shriver Center on Poverty Law 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.
- Center for Intercultural Organizing — 28% of income from government
- National Consumer Law Center Inc — 1% 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.