· Private foundation
Yagan Family Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k6 grants · $22k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
- $50k–250k13 grants · $1.4M
- $250k+2 grants · $550k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| University of Chicago Center for Free Expression | $300,000 |
| The Institute for Political Innovation | $250,000 |
| Yale University | $200,000 |
| Harvard University-Opportunity Insights | $200,000 |
| Lawndale Christian Legal Center | $150,000 |
| The Honeycomb Project | $128,820 |
| Urban Initiatives | $100,000 |
| Start Early FKA Ounce of Prevention | $100,000 |
| Represent US | $100,000 |
| Unite America Institute Inc | $100,000 |
| Fund for Constitutional Government | $100,000 |
| Overdose Crisis Response Fund | $79,921 |
| Invest for Better | $50,000 |
| One Goal | $50,000 |
| Rush University Medical Center | $50,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $1.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 92% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
34 repeat relationships — 16 still active in FY2024, 18 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $542k 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
- THTHE HONEYCOMB PROJECT INC NFP7× · 2017–2024 · $623k · revenue +32% · 45% of their budget
- LCLAWNDALE CHRISTIAN LEGAL CENTER6× · 2017–2024 · $495k · revenue +173%
- OONEGOAL8× · 2017–2024 · $335k · revenue +44%
Funded once
- YUYALE UNIVERSITYone grant, 2023 · $200k
- CCChicago Community Trust Donor Advised Fundone grant, 2020 · $160k
- UOUniversity of Chicago Center for Free Enterpriseone grant, 2022 · $150k
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.
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
The chicago public education fund (the fund) is a nonprofit organization that improves public schools in chicago by investing in the talented educators who lead them.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…
The team at kipp chicago schools is guided by a simple, yet powerful mission: to create a network of excellent schools in chicago that teach our students the character and academic skills necessary to succeed in college and beyond, and to…
The global impact investing network, inc. is dedicated to increasing the scale and effectiveness of impact investing to solve systemic problems facing people and the planet. impact investments are investments made into companies,…
Chief executives for corporate purpose (cecp) is the only business counsel and network dedicated to driving measurable returns on purpose. we promote responsible purpose-driven business as it increases customer loyalty, builds employee…
Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…
Ai4all's mission is to ensure that the next generation of ai leaders reflects humanity. ai4all is transforming the pipeline of ai practitioners who will shape ai for the benefit of humanity.
Engage actively and continuously in medical research, education and training in the practice of medicine in conjunction with the department of family medicine of the indiana university school of medicine and indiana university…
Activate empowers scientists to reinvent the world by bringing their research to market. activate partners with u.s. based funders, research institutions, and other pillars of the hard technology community to help entrepreneurial…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Center for Family Philanthropy Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Nature Institute. 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 25 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
75 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. 75 of the 111 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 THE HONEYCOMB PROJECT INC NFP ↗
- Who funds LAWNDALE CHRISTIAN LEGAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds RepresentUs ↗
- Who funds ONEGOAL ↗
- Who funds URBAN INITIATIVES INC ↗
- Who funds UNITE AMERICA INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds METROPOLITAN PLANNING COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR POLITICAL INNOVATION INC ↗
- Who funds FUND FOR CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT ↗
- Who funds KARAM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS CHICAGO INC ↗
- Who funds LEADERS IN TECH INC ↗
- Who funds ISSUE ONE ↗
- Who funds INVEST FOR BETTER INC ↗
- Who funds Rush University Medical Center ↗
- Who funds OVERDOSE CRISIS RESPONSE FUND ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL HARM REDUCTION COALITION ↗
- Who funds Boston Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Freedmen Heirs Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds IMPACTASSETSINC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY INITIATIVES ↗
- Who funds Vocal Justice ↗
- Who funds JERSEY COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds LEXINGTON HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 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: John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Polk Bros Foundation Inc · Arie and Ida Crown Memorial · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · United Way of Metropolitan Chicago Inc · Fifth Third Chicagoland Foundation · Robert R McCormick Foundation · Circle of Service Foundation · Motorola Solutions Foundation · The Rockefeller Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation
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 Yagan Family Foundation 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Boston Foundation Inc — 0% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Yagan Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Yagan Family 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.