Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Arc 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.

$20k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2024 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$10kYouth Development$4kHousing & Shelter$3kFood & Nutrition$3kCivil Rights$2kHuman Services$2kCrime & Legal$500Health$400Other$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$230k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$10,000
WBEZCHICAGO PUBLIC MEDIA$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 (FY24–24, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%URBAN INITIATIVES: $3k → 14%CHICAGO STREET MEDICINE: $100 → 14%THE HONEYCOMB PROJECT: $500 → 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.
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
Students Run Chicago
Health
2
Chicago United for Equity

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

Civil Rights
3
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
4
Chicago Votes

Chicago Votes is a non-partisan, non-profit organization building a more inclusive democracy by putting power in the hands of young Chicagoans. We're engaging and developing a new generation of leaders by opening the doors of government,…

Civil Rights
5
Chicago's Green City Market Program

Green city market is securing the future of food by deepening support for sustainable farmers, educating our community, and expanding access to locally-grown food.

Food & Nutrition
6
Grassroots Collaborative

Grassroots Collaborative unites eight membership-based organizations in order to create policy change on local and statewide levels. The organization's multi-racial coalition spans a variety of organizing networks; including low-wage…

Education
7
Ur Chicago Alliance

UR Chicago Alliance is a faith-based work development program that unites and mobilizes churches, community organizations and businesses to provide access to living-wage opportunities and long-term support through a network of…

Employment
8
Chicago Refugee Coalition

The Chicago Refugee Coalition is a 501c3 non-profit organization dedicated ot the alleviation of human suffering through innovative partnerships, advocacy and community empowerment.

Human Services
9
True Chicago
Arts & Culture
10
Chicago Cares Inc

Chicago Cares, Inc. mobilizes volunteers to build a stronger, more unified Chicago.

Community Improvement
11
Chicago's Environmental Fund
—
12
Chicago Food Policy Action Council

The Organization facilitates and informs the development of and advocacy for responsible policies improving the food sovereignty of Chicago residents as they have power and control to determine culturally appropriate, nutritionally sound…

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chicago Public Media Inc; the most unlike its peers is Chicago Street Medicine. 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

11 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. 11 of the 18 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
2/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMERCY HOUSING: $1,500 · OtherMERCY HOUSINGCHICAGO HOPE FOR KIDS: $1,000 · OtherCHICAGO HOPE FOR KIDSTHE NHP FOUNDATION: $1,000 · OtherTHE NHP FOUNDATION+5 more: $2,413 · Other+5 moreCHICAGO PUBLIC MEDIA INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureCHICAGO PUBLIC MEDIA INCURBAN INITIATIVES INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesURBAN INIT…THE HONEYCOMB PROJECT INC NFP: $500 · Human ServicesTHE HONEYC…+1 more: $100 · Human ServicesRESCUING LEFTOVER CUISINE INC: $1,000 · Food & NutritionURBAN GROWERS COLLECTIVE INC: $500 · Food & NutritionCHICAGO REHAB NETWORK: $1,030 · Housing & ShelterMIDWEST ACCESS COALITION: $1,000 · Civil RightsGARDENEERS: $500 · Education
Other$15,913Arts & Culture$10,000Human Services$3,100Food & Nutrition$1,500Housing & Shelter$1,030Civil Rights$1,000Education$500

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCHICAGO PUBLIC MEDIA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetURBAN INITIATIVES INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHICAGO REHAB NETWORK: $1,030 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMIDWEST ACCESS COALITION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRESCUING LEFTOVER CUISINE INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HONEYCOMB PROJECT INC NFP: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRole Model Movement Inc (NFP): $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetURBAN GROWERS COLLECTIVE INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALS THERAPY DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION INC: $400 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.

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 TrustIL14.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · 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 The Arc Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Arc Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 8%
  • Als Therapy Development Foundation Inc: 8% of 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 · 0–25%
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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Arc Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Arc 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 18 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 Arc’s filings →

More from the funding graph