Skip to content
William J Clancy Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

William J Clancy 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.

$65k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Human Services$93kArts & Culture$80kHealth$65kYouth Development$55kEducation$45kEnvironment$45kAnimals$45kFood & Nutrition$45kOther$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$474k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HOWARD BROWN HEALTH BENEFIT$5,000
THE GIFT OF CARL FOUNDATION$5,000
RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES$5,000
BROOKFIELD ZOO$5,000
BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS$5,000
UKRANIAN RELIEF PROJECT$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
BUDDY'S PLACE OF PILLARS$5,000
MORTON ARBORETUM YOUTH SCIENCE$5,000
BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK$5,000
CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN$5,000
PEGGY NOTEBAERT MUSEUM$5,000
WORKING IN THE SCHOOLS$5,000
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 (FY17–25, $48k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, 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%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $5k → 15%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $5k → 15%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $5k → 15%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $5k → 15%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $5k → 15%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $5k → 15%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $5k → 15%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $5k → 15%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $5k → 15%CRADLES TO CRAYONS: $3k → 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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$575k · 22 repeat orgs$23k to everyone else

22 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
4

Total granted

$575k
$18k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
+382%

Still filing today

45%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthEducationPhilanthropyEnvironmentAnimalsOther
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

  • WI
    WORKING IN THE SCHOOLS INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $45k · revenue +30%
  • BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $45k · revenue +49%
  • CH
    CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $45k · revenue +37%

Funded once

  • CI
    COMMUNITY INITIATIVES FOR THE BENEF
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • CS
    CHICAGO SUN-TIMES CHARITY TRUST EMPTY STOCKING FUND
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • CA
    COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF COOK COUNTYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +382%
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
True Chicago
Arts & Culture
2
Chicago Toy & Game Foundation
—
3
Students Run Chicago
Health
4
Illinois Children's Healthcare Foundation
Human Services
5
The Chicago Innovation Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Chicago's Environmental Fund
—
7
Chicago Board of Trade Foundation
—
8
Childrens Hospital of Illinois Medical Group

To support the mission of osf healthcare system, a catholic integrated health care delivery system, through the provision of quality health care services related to comprehensive inpatient and outpatient care for children.

—
9
Kinship Foundation
Community Improvement
10
Chicago Freedom Trust
Philanthropy
11
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
12
The Richard H Driehaus Foundation
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chicago Horticultural Society; the most unlike its peers is Ukrainian Diabetes Project. 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 27 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
7/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BUDDY'S PLACE OF PILLARS: $45,000 · OtherBUDDY'S PLACE OF PILLARSBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS: $35,000 · OtherBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERSTHE MORTON ARBORETUM YOUTH SCIENCE: $35,000 · OtherTHE MORTON ARBORETUM YOUTH SCIENCECHICAGO SUN TIMES CHARITY TRUST: $25,000 · OtherCHICAGO SUN TIMES CHARITY TRUSTPEGGY NOTEBART MUSEUM: $25,000 · OtherPEGGY NOTEBART MUSEUMRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE: $25,000 · OtherRONALD MCDONALD HOUSEHOWARD BROWN HEALTH FOR THE BENEFIT: $20,000 · OtherHOWARD BROWN HEALTH FOR THE BENEFITHeadstand: $15,000 · Other+11 more: $90,000 · Other+11 moreUkrainian Diabetes Project: $35,000 · HealthUkrainian …Ronald McDonald House Global: $20,000 · HealthRonald McD…BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC: $45,000 · Human ServicesBLESSINGS…CRADLES TO CRAYONS INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesWORKING IN THE SCHOOLS INC: $45,000 · EducationTHE GIFT OF CARL FOUNDATION INC: $45,000 · PhilanthropyCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $45,000 · EnvironmentChicago Zoological Society: $45,000 · Animals
Other$315,000Health$55,000Human Services$47,500Education$45,000Philanthropy$45,000Environment$45,000Animals$45,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWORKING IN THE SCHOOLS INC: $45,000 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetBLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC: $45,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetTHE GIFT OF CARL FOUNDATION INC: $45,000 over 9y, 38% of budgetCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $45,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetChicago Zoological Society: $45,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetUkrainian Diabetes Project: $35,000 over 7y, 6.5% of budgetCHICAGO SUN TIMES CHARITY TRUST: $25,000 over 5y, 41% of budgetRonald McDonald House Global: $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CHICAGO ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBIG BROTHERS-BIG SISTERS OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF COOK COUNTY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCRADLES TO CRAYONS INC: $2,500 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 WORKING IN THE SCHOOLS INC ↗
  • Who funds BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC ↗
  • Who funds THE GIFT OF CARL FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds Chicago Zoological Society ↗
  • Who funds Ukrainian Diabetes Project ↗
  • Who funds CHICAGO SUN TIMES CHARITY TRUST ↗
  • Who funds Ronald McDonald House Global ↗
  • Who funds THE CHICAGO ACADEMY OF SCIENCES ↗
  • Who funds BIG BROTHERS-BIG SISTERS OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF COOK COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds CRADLES TO CRAYONS INC ↗

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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 William J Clancy Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from William J Clancy Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Cradles to Crayons Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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 27 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 William J Clancy’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