· Private foundation
The Thomas L and Kathleen G Bindley Charitable Trust
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k24 grants · $58k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $71k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHICAGO JESUIT ACADEMY | $17,500 |
| BREAKTHROUGH URBAN MINISTRIES | $12,000 |
| CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST | $11,000 |
| HANDS TOGETHER | $10,000 |
| DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE | $10,000 |
| AID FOR WOMEN | $10,000 |
| JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF CHICAGO | $6,000 |
| LEARN TO EARN SOUTH AFRICA | $6,000 |
| BY THE HAND CLUB FOR KIDS | $5,000 |
| ST ALBANS SCHOOL | $5,000 |
| CRU | $3,000 |
| HOPE FOR SILENT VOICES | $3,000 |
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY | $3,000 |
| GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY | $2,500 |
| EVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION | $2,500 |
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 (FY19–25, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 13% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +47% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.
56 repeat relationships — 29 still active in FY2025, 27 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
- AFAID FOR WOMEN INC9× · 2017–2025 · $121k · revenue +215%
- BUBREAKTHROUGH URBAN MINISTRIES INC9× · 2017–2025 · $99k · revenue +207%
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc7× · 2019–2025 · $45k · revenue +75%
Funded once
- TCTHE CHICAGO CLUB PRESERVATION FOUNDATIONone grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue -95%
- TITHE IMMOKALEE FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +25%
- VCVigo County Historical Society Incone grant, 2018 · $3k · revenue -15%
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.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
Lake Forest Graduate School of Management's mission is to bring the real world to business education and leadership development.
Sof is called to empower warriors to find purpose, be resilient, and live well. we develop and provide customized treatment plans for veterans through our national network of partners.
We provide exemplary interdisciplinary programs for a community of scholar-practitioners within a distributed learning model grounded in student-driven inquiry and leading to enhanced knowledge.
Bibleproject's mission is to help people experience the bible as a unified story that leads to jesus. this is achieved by creating biblical videos to be regularly released on a newly-created youtube channel. (continued on schedule o.)each…
As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.
Walk thru the bible (wtb) ignites passion for god's word. by developing a global network of influential pastors and leaders and then resourcing them with tools and training, wtb fulfills its role in the great commission.
Our mission is to break the cycle of addiction and trauma for women, children, and families.
At the internet society foundation, we focus on funding initiatives that strengthen the internet in function and reach so that it can effectively serve all people. our work advances the vision of the internet society (isoc): the internet…
The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Special Operations Warrior Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 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 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
36 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. 36 of the 77 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 AID FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds BREAKTHROUGH URBAN MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds Hands Together Inc ↗
- Who funds JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN BIBLE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Mens Golf Fellowship Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERSON MUSIC MINISTRIES ↗
- Who funds By The Hand Club For Kids ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Chicago Bible Society ↗
- Who funds HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES AND MAINTENANCE FOR THE ELDERLY INC ↗
- Who funds Fun Time Early Childhood Academy Inc ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTLANE LEARNING CORP ↗
- Who funds THE CHICAGO CLUB PRESERVATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SOME INC ↗
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: The Ayco Charitable Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · National Philanthropic Trust · AbbVie Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
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 The Thomas L and Kathleen G Bindley Charitable Trust 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% 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.