Skip to content
Shriver Center on Poverty Law at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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.

$225k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$143k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Health$823kCrime & Legal$656kCivil Rights$390kHousing & Shelter$146kFood & Nutrition$30kEducation$25kCommunity Improvement$21kInternational$20kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $216,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $225,489 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $8,989 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k6 grants · $44k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $30k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $143k
$7,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$8.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FAMILIES USA FOUNDATION INC$142,500
CHICAGO APPLESEED FUND FOR JUSTICE$30,000
HOUSING ACTION ILLINOIS$7,500
HOUSING CHOICE PARTNERS$7,500
HOPE FAIR HOUSING CENTER$7,500
CHICAGO AREA FAIR HOUSING ALLIANCE$7,500
CHICAGO COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS$7,500
ILLINOIS PRIMARY HEALTHCARE ASSOCIATION$6,500
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 (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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%FAMILIES USA FOUNDATION INC: $146k → 14%DUPAGE FEDERATION OF HUMAN SERVICES: $11k → 7%FAMILIES USA FOUNDATION INC: $143k → 14%FAMILIES USA FOUNDATION INC: $86k → 14%DUPAGE FEDERATION OF HUMAN SERVICES: $11k → 7%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

ME
WA
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
OH
PA
KY
VA
NM
KS
AR
NC
SC
DC
MS
GA
TX
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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.9M · 24 repeat orgs$231k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +57% since the first grant, against +29% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
18

Total granted

$1.9M
$224k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%
+29%

Still filing today

96%
94%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
Crime & LegalCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterHealthOther
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

  • FU
    FAMILIES USA FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $375k · revenue +31%
  • EI
    EVERTHRIVE ILLINOIS
    6× · 2017–2023 · $265k · revenue +57%
  • IC
    ILLINOIS COALITION FOR IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS
    4× · 2020–2023 · $227k · revenue +239%

Funded once

  • AM
    ALIVIO MEDICAL CENTER INC
    one grant, 2022 · $40k · revenue -8%
  • SC
    SOUTH CAROLINA APPLESEED LEGAL JUSTICE CENTER
    one grant, 2020 · $30k · revenue -39%
  • AF
    AIDS Foundation of Chicago
    one grant, 2023 · $30k · revenue +16%
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
Legal Aid Chicago

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…

Crime & Legal
2
Chicago Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law Inc

Secure racial equity and economic opportunity for all

Crime & Legal
3
District of Columbia Access to Justice

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.

Crime & Legal
4
Michigan Advocacy Program

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.

Crime & Legal
5
Law Center for Better Housing

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.

Crime & Legal
6
Equal Justice Center

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…

Civil Rights
7
Legal Aid Society of the District of Columbia

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…

—
8
Chicago United for Equity

Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.

Civil Rights
9
Lakeshore Legal Aid

Standing with our neighbors, Lakeshore Legal Aid fights poverty and injustice through advocacy and by providing meaningful and dignified access to the legal system.

Crime & Legal
10
Inner City Law Center

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.

Crime & Legal
11
Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area

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.

—
12
Colorado Center On Law and Policy

Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Mexico Center On Law and Poverty; 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.
04the grantee network

41 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. 41 of the 43 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)
14
Early backer (in before they grew)
41/41
Grantees still filing
32/41
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EVERTHRIVE ILLINOIS: $264,647 · OtherEVERTHRIVE ILLINOISLegal Council for Health Justice: $216,978 · OtherLegal Council for Health JusticeWORKERS CENTER FOR RACIAL JUSTICE: $92,614 · OtherWORKERS CENTER FOR RACIAL JUSTICECHICAGO AREA FAIR HOUSING ALLIANCE: $44,000 · OtherCHICAGO AREA FAIR HOUSING ALLIANCEHeartland Alliance for Human Needs and Rights: $39,603 · OtherHousing Action Illinois: $29,000 · OtherLATINO POLICY FORUM: $28,978 · OtherGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $29,603 · Other+5 more: $56,728 · Other+5 moreFAMILIES USA FOUNDATION INC: $375,000 · Human ServicesFAMILIES USA FOUNDATION…NORTH CAROLINA JUSTICE CENTER: $44,600 · Human ServicesNORTH CAROLINA JUSTICE …DUPAGE FEDERATION ON HUMAN SERVICES REFORM: $22,728 · Human ServicesFund for Justice: $123,000 · Crime & LegalFund for JusticeNEW MEXICO CENTER ON LAW AND POVERTY: $49,000 · Crime & LegalNEW MEXICO CENTER O…OFFICE OF KENTUCKY LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAMS INC: $47,222 · Crime & LegalOFFICE OF KENTUCKY …Maine Equal Justice Partners: $45,000 · Crime & LegalMaine Equal Justice…COLUMBIA LEGAL SERVICES: $32,000 · Crime & LegalCOLUMBIA LEGAL SERV…LEGAL AID OF SOUTHEAST AND CENTRAL OHIO: $16,000 · Crime & LegalLEGAL AID JUSTICE CENTER: $14,600 · Crime & Legal+6 more: $31,236 · Crime & Legal+6 moreILLINOIS COALITION FOR IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS: $226,592 · Civil RightsILLINOIS COALIT…SOUTH CAROLINA APPLESEED LEGAL JUSTICE CENTER: $30,000 · Civil RightsSOUTH CAROLINA …Citizen Action Illinois: $15,000 · Civil Rights+2 more: $16,000 · Civil Rights+2 moreTexas Appleseed: $56,000 · Community ImprovementBRIGHTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL: $18,100 · Community ImprovementSMALL BUSINESS ADVOCACY COUNCIL: $10,000 · Community ImprovementGREATER DAYTON UNION COOPERATIVE INITIATIVE INC: $8,333 · Community ImprovementALIVIO MEDICAL CENTER INC: $40,000 · HealthAIDS Foundation of Chicago: $30,000 · HealthCHICAGO COALITION TO END HOMELESSNESS: $34,603 · Housing & ShelterHCP OF ILLINOIS INC: $15,000 · Housing & ShelterHOPE FAIR HOUSING CENTER INC: $15,000 · Housing & Shelter
Other$802,151Human Services$442,328Crime & Legal$358,058Civil Rights$287,592Community Improvement$92,433Health$70,000Housing & Shelter$64,603

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 budgetFAMILIES USA FOUNDATION INC: $375,000 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetEVERTHRIVE ILLINOIS: $264,647 over 6y, 3.9% of budgetILLINOIS COALITION FOR IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE RIGHTS: $226,592 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetLegal Council for Health Justice: $216,978 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetFund for Justice: $123,000 over 2y, 15% of budgetTexas Appleseed: $56,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetNEW MEXICO CENTER ON LAW AND POVERTY: $49,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetOFFICE OF KENTUCKY LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAMS INC: $47,222 over 4y, 2.4% of budgetMaine Equal Justice Partners: $45,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA JUSTICE CENTER: $44,600 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetCHICAGO AREA FAIR HOUSING ALLIANCE: $44,000 over 3y, 7.9% of budgetALIVIO MEDICAL CENTER INC: $40,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHeartland Alliance for Human Needs and Rights: $39,603 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCHICAGO COALITION TO END HOMELESSNESS: $34,603 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCOLUMBIA LEGAL SERVICES: $32,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSOUTH CAROLINA APPLESEED LEGAL JUSTICE CENTER: $30,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetAIDS Foundation of Chicago: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $29,603 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHousing Action Illinois: $29,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetLATINO POLICY FORUM: $28,978 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetDUPAGE FEDERATION ON HUMAN SERVICES REFORM: $22,728 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE OF JOLIET: $22,728 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBRIGHTON PARK NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL: $18,100 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetLEGAL AID OF SOUTHEAST AND CENTRAL OHIO: $16,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHCP OF ILLINOIS INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetHOPE FAIR HOUSING CENTER INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetCitizen Action Illinois: $15,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetLEGAL AID JUSTICE CENTER: $14,600 over 2y, 0.1% of budget482 FORWARD: $10,500 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetSMALL BUSINESS ADVOCACY COUNCIL: $10,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetGenesee County Legal Aid Society DBA Center for Civil Justice: $10,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetGEORGIA APPLESEED INC: $9,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetGREATER DAYTON UNION COOPERATIVE INITIATIVE INC: $8,333 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCENTER FOR INTERCULTURAL ORGANIZING: $7,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetIllinois Primary Health Care Association: $6,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEMPIRE JUSTICE CENTER: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKansas Appleseed Center for Law and Justice Inc: $5,236 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL CONSUMER LAW CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY LEGAL SERVICES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLEGAL AID OF ARKANSAS: $5,000 over 1y, 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.

New Venture FundMAZON A Jewish Respon…The Chicago Community…National Health Law P…Amalgamated Charitabl…United Way of Metropo…Michael Reese Health …WK Kellogg FoundationEqual Justice WorksField Foundation of I…The Ford FoundationCenter for Law and So…
New Venture FundDC25× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Shriver Center on Poverty Law funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Shriver Center on Poverty Law. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 28%
  • Center for Intercultural Organizing: 28% of income from government
  • National Consumer Law Center Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
16report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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.

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 43 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 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 Shriver Center on Poverty Law’s 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