Skip to content
Women Employed at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Women Employed

To improve the economic status of women and remove barriers to economic equity.

$256k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$54k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$163kHuman Services$59kEmployment$48kHousing & Shelter$8k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $175,600, the rows itemized in this filing. The $256,415 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $80,815 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $105k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $54k
$27,175
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER$54,375
INSTITUTO DEL PROGRESO LATINO$40,775
HEALTH AND MEDICINE POLICY RESEARCH GROUP$27,175
ESPERANZA HEALTH CENTERS$27,175
ERIE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE$10,000
CENTER FOR CHANGING LIVES$8,100
KAN-WIN$8,000
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 (FY24–25, $95k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%YWCA METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $6k → 14%ERIE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE: $17k → 14%ERIE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE: $10k → 14%INSTITUTO DEL PROGRESO LATINO: $41k → 14%INSTITUTO DEL PROGRESO LATINO: $14k → 14%KAN-WIN: $8k → 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.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$190k · 4 repeat orgs$88k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +10% since the first grant, against +3% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
3

Total granted

$190k
$18k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+10%
+3%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $70k went to new ones.

50%100%’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’24’25
Human ServicesHealthHousing & ShelterCrime & LegalOther
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

  • IF
    INSTITUTE FOR LATINO PROGRESS
    2× · 2024–2025 · $54k · revenue +5%
  • EH
    ESPERANZA HEALTH CENTERS
    2× · 2024–2025 · $54k · revenue +10%
  • EN
    ERIE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE
    2× · 2024–2025 · $27k · revenue +14%

Funded once

  • AG
    APNA GHAR INC
    one grant, 2024 · $6k · revenue -12%
  • L
    LIFE-SPAN
    one grant, 2024 · $6k · revenue +10%
  • YM
    YWCA METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
    one grant, 2024 · $6k · revenue +3%
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
Latinos in Virginia Empowerment Center

Provide education, advocacy, and support to spanish speaking individuals affected by violence and injustice in virginia to ensure that they can access services to empower them to become happy, healthy, and self- sufficient.

Crime & Legal
2
California Pan-Ethnic Health Network

To promote health equity by advocating for public policies and sufficient resources to address the health needs of communities of color.

Health
3
Enlace Chicago

Enlace Chicago convenes, organizes, and builds the capacity of little village stakeholders to confront systemic inequities and barriers to economic and social access. Enlace Chicago is dedicated to making a positive difference in the lives…

Community Improvement
4
El Programa Hispano Catolico

Our mission is to advance racial equity & social justice through the power of our latin roots, culture & community.

Human Services
5
Lowell Community Health Center Inc

Lowell community health center's mission is to provide caring, quality, and culturally competent health services to the people of greater lowell, regardless of their financial status; to reduce health disparities and enhance the health of…

Health
6
Asian Pacific Health Care Venture Inc

Asian Pacific Health Care Venture, Inc. is a family of community health centers whose mission is to be the medical home for our patients by providing personalized, quality health care services in a culturally accessible manner.

—
7
Casaluz

The mission of casaluz is to prevent and reduce domestic violence and related crimes in the spanish-speaking community and to promote equal access to justice and other services.

Human Services
8
Center for Pan Asian Community Services

To develop a comprehensive social and health service program to support diverse, multilingual, and under-resourced populations. the center service areas include health counseling, senior services, housing counseling, legal, education, and…

—
9
Chicago Women's Health Center

The organization is committed to the mission of facilitating the empowerment of women, trans people, and young people by providing access to health care and health education in a respectful environment where people pay what they can afford.

—
10
Esperanza United

Esperanza united's mission is to mobilize latinas and latino communities to end domestic violence.

Human Services
11
The Network Advocating Against Domestic Violence

The Network is a group of 40+ member organizations dedicated to improving the lives of those impacted by gender-based violence through education, public policy and advocacy, and connecting community members with direct service providers.…

Human Services
12
Hispano Care Inc

Hispanocare's mission is to provide affordable, quality, bilingual, bicultural healthcare to chicago's latino community. an important part of our mission is to actively participate in community outreach. these outreach activities provide…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Health and Medicine Policy Research Group; the most unlike its peers is Rush University Medical Center. 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

10 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.

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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Rush University Medical Center: $54,375 · HealthRush University Medical CenterESPERANZA HEALTH CENTERS: $54,375 · HealthESPERANZA HEALTH CENTERSHEALTH AND MEDICINE POLICY RESEARCH GROUP: $54,375 · HealthHEALTH AND MEDICINE POLICY RESEARCH GROUPINSTITUTE FOR LATINO PROGRESS: $54,375 · Human ServicesINSTITUTE FOR LATINO PROGRESSERIE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE: $26,800 · Human ServicesERIE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSEKAN-WIN: $8,000 · Human ServicesKAN-WINYWCA METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $5,750 · Human ServicesYWCA METROPOLITAN CHICAGOCenter for Changing Lives: $8,100 · Housing & ShelterAPNA GHAR INC: $6,000 · Housing & ShelterLIFE-SPAN: $6,000 · Crime & Legal
Health$163,125Human Services$94,925Housing & Shelter$14,100Crime & Legal$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetINSTITUTE FOR LATINO PROGRESS: $54,375 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetRush University Medical Center: $54,375 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetESPERANZA HEALTH CENTERS: $54,375 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHEALTH AND MEDICINE POLICY RESEARCH GROUP: $54,375 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetERIE NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE: $26,800 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetKAN-WIN: $8,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAPNA GHAR INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLIFE-SPAN: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetYWCA METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $5,750 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.

United Way of Metropo…Lloyd a Fry FoundationThe Chicago Community…Polk Bros Foundation …Chicago Foundation fo…Circle of Service Fou…Visiting Nurse Associ…Healthy Communities F…Michael Reese Health …Chicago Cook Workforc…UnidosusArie and Ida Crown Me…
United Way of Metropolitan Chicago IncIL21.9× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · Lloyd a Fry Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Polk Bros Foundation Inc · Chicago Foundation for Women · Circle of Service Foundation · Visiting Nurse Association of Chicago (Aka) Vna Foundation · Healthy Communities Foundation · Michael Reese Health Trust · Chicago Cook Workforce Partnership · Unidosus · Arie and Ida Crown Memorial

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 Women Employed funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Women Employed. 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%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s 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 · 0–50%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Women Employed?

    Find your warmest path to Women Employed 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 10 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Women Employed’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