Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

All Voting Is Local

ALL VOTING IS LOCAL (avl) focuses its nonpartisan programming in three core ways: 1) fighting voter suppression against american citizens and opening up pathways to registration and voting - at every turn and for eligible voters; 2) safeguarding our elections by pushing back against state and local officials who reject or undermine…

$2.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
45
Grants FY2024still arriving
11
States reached
$364k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2024.

Public Benefit$3.0MCivil Rights$40k
02FY2024 · 45 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 45 grants below total $2,327,717 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,465,026 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $137,309 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $33k
  • $10k–50k31 grants · $608k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $371k
  • $250k+4 grants · $1.3M
$20,000
Median grant
11
States reached
$13M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND$363,717
PROGRESS NOW ARIZONA INSTITUTE$350,000
ONE ARIZONA$327,000
INTER-TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC$275,000
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS ARIZONA$110,000
GEORGIA COALITION FOR THE PEOPLE'S AGENDA$58,000
OHIO VOICE$53,000
ARIZONA ECUMENICAL COUNCIL$50,000
CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER$50,000
INSTITUTO LAB$50,000
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA$44,000
MAKE THE ROAD STATES INC$40,000
INFORMING DEMOCRACY EDUCATION FUND$40,000
FUERTE ART COLLECTIVE$40,000
PROMOTE THE VOTE PA$35,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY22–24, $368k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 82% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%MAKE THE ROAD STATES INC: $40k → 20%HISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MI: $8k → 11%MIGRANT EQUITY SOUTHEAST INC: $10k → 16%MAKE THE ROAD STATES NEVADA: $47k → 13%CASA IN ACTION: $10k → 11%MAKE THE ROAD STATES - NV: $30k → 20%GENERATION DATA EDUCATION FUND: $10k → 14%GEORGIA LATINO ALLIANCE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS: $10k → 14%GEORGIA COALITION FOR THE PEOPLE'S AGENDA: $58k → 13%PROMOTE THE VOTE PA: $35k → 22%THE GA COALITION FOR THE PEOPLE'S AGENDA: $40k → 13%GEORGIA COALITION FOR THE PEOPLE'S AGENDA: $20k → 13%INSTITUTO LAB: $50k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

IL
WI
MI
NY
NV
OH
PA
NJ
CA
MD
AZ
DC
GA
FL

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

30%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$930k · 14 repeat orgs$2.1M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +24% since the first grant, against +5% for the ones you funded once.

14 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 30 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
29

Total granted

$930k
$409k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
+5%

Still filing today

100%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 26% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.7M went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
Civil RightsHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitEducationArts & CultureOther

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

  • IT
    INTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $325k · revenue +16%
  • GC
    Georgia Coalition for the People's Agenda
    3× · 2022–2024 · $118k · revenue +44%
  • MT
    Make The Road States Inc
    3× · 2022–2024 · $117k · revenue +44%

Funded once

  • LO
    LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA EDUCAT
    one grant, 2022 · $42k · revenue -97%
  • FI
    FAITH IN PUBLIC LIFE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $30k · revenue -70%
  • ML
    MICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -45%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Civica Initiatives

Empower people and strengthen democratic institutions

Community Improvement
2
League of Women Voters of New Jersey

Through grassroots people-powered advocacy and organizing, lwvnj trains, mobilizes, and educates advocates to have a greater voice in government and influence public policy.

—
3
Elevated Voices Inc

Voter education around policy

—
4
Democracy Works Inc

The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.

Civil Rights
5
America Votes

The Organization was established to coordinate and promote progressive issues, policies, initiatives, and referenda, and to pursue electoral reform that expands access to the ballot.

Community Improvement
6
Equality State Policy Center

As a non-partisan coalition-based organization, the equality state policy center advances fair elections and transparent government in support of all wyoming communities.

Public Benefit
7
Our Voice Our Vote Arizona

Our voice our vote arizona engages in community organizing, leadership development, and civic participation efforts. the organization focuses on voter registration, education, and engagement to strengthen communities and encourage active…

Civil Rights
8
League of Women Voters of Ohio

The league of women voters, a nonpartisan political organization, encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and influences public policy through education and…

—
9
League of Women Voters of New Jersey Education Fund

Lwvnj-ef's nonpartisan voter education and voter protection work ensures everyone has the tools, resources, and confidence they need to participate fully at the ballot box and beyond.

Civil Rights
10
American Civil Liberties Union of Delaware Inc

The organization monitors legislation that could impact civil liberties and takes the necessary action to support or oppose such legislation.

—
11
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
12
League of Women Voters of Minnesota Educ

The league of women voters minnesota a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization committed to civic engagement, with a mission to empower voters and defend democracy. membership is open to all genders age 16 and up. through our partnership with…

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is League of Women Voters of Florida Educat and the most unlike its peers is Sowega Rising. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyCommunity College Foundatio…Community FoundationsCommunity Arts CentersFaith-Based Social ServicesWomen & Girls Leadership De…Immigrant Worker SupportPolicy Research and Advocacy
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 13 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%14%<5yr14%29%5–10yr19%20%10–20yr16%20%20–35yr13%9%35–55yr16%9%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%7%<5yr14%31%5–10yr19%19%10–20yr16%21%20–35yr13%15%35–55yr16%7%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 14% of your grantees by number, and just 7% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
1%1/75
the rest of the field
13%
240,395/1,819,490

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.

04the grantee network

65 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. 65 of the 75 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
65/65
Grantees still filing
27/65
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ONE ARIZONA — $327,000 · Civil RightsONE ARIZONABVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC — $47,500 · Civil RightsBVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTIT…Fair Elections Center — $46,500 · Civil RightsFair Elections CenterLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA EDUCAT — $41,500 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FL…INFORMING DEMOCRACY EDUCATION FUND — $40,000 · Civil RightsINSTITUTE FOR A PROGRESSIVE NEVADA — $40,000 · Civil RightsWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC — $30,000 · Civil Rights+13 more — $195,989 · Civil Rights+13 moreINTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC — $325,000 · OtherINTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA IN…LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ARIZONA — $110,000 · OtherLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF ARIZONAARIZONA ECUMENICAL COUNCIL — $50,000 · OtherARIZONA ECUMENICAL COUNCILLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA — $44,000 · OtherFuerte Art Collective — $40,000 · OtherWISCONSIN DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN INC — $32,000 · Other+25 more — $323,200 · Other+25 moreCOMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND — $363,717 · Public BenefitCOMMON CAUSE EDUC…OHIO VOICE — $66,000 · Public BenefitOHIO VOICECivic Engagement Beyond Voting — $24,000 · Public Benefit+2 more — $25,000 · Public BenefitGeorgia Coalition for the People's Agenda — $118,000 · Human ServicesGeorgia Coali…Make The Road States Inc — $117,000 · Human ServicesMake The Road…Instituto Lab — $50,000 · Human ServicesInstituto LabPROMOTE THE VOTE PA — $35,000 · Human ServicesPROMOTE THE V…+5 more — $48,000 · Human Services+5 morePROGRESS NOW ARIZONA INSTITUTE — $350,000 · InternationalPROGRESS NOW…ASIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL — $37,000 · Community ImprovementDETROIT CHANGE INITIATIVE — $20,000 · Community ImprovementSowega Rising — $18,000 · Community ImprovementHISPANIC FEDERATION INC — $17,500 · Community ImprovementCEIBA INC — $10,000 · Community ImprovementGALEO LATINO COMMUNITY DEVELOP FUND INC — $10,000 · Community ImprovementCULTUREWORKS GREATER PHILADELPHIA — $8,000 · Community ImprovementTHE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC — $50,000 · Crime & LegalHuman Rights Coalition — $20,000 · Crime & Legal
Civil Rights$768,489Other$924,200Public Benefit$478,717Human Services$368,000International$350,000Community Improvement$120,500Crime & Legal$70,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCOMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND — $363,717 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetPROGRESS NOW ARIZONA INSTITUTE — $350,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetONE ARIZONA — $327,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetINTER TRIBAL COUNCIL OF ARIZONA INC — $325,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetGeorgia Coalition for the People's Agenda — $118,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetMake The Road States Inc — $117,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetOHIO VOICE — $66,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetTHE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC — $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetInstituto Lab — $50,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetARIZONA ECUMENICAL COUNCIL — $50,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetBVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC — $47,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFair Elections Center — $46,500 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA EDUCAT — $41,500 over 1y, 16% of budgetINFORMING DEMOCRACY EDUCATION FUND — $40,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR A PROGRESSIVE NEVADA — $40,000 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetFuerte Art Collective — $40,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetASIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL — $37,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetPROMOTE THE VOTE PA — $35,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetWISCONSIN DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN INC — $32,000 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetFAITH IN PUBLIC LIFE INC — $30,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC — $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF WISCONSIN INC — $25,000 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetCivic Engagement Beyond Voting — $24,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetNew PA Project Education Fund — $23,800 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetGeorgia Muslim Voter Project — $22,500 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetAMERICAN CONSTITUTION SOCIETY FOR LAW & POLICY — $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetDETROIT CHANGE INITIATIVE — $20,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetONE PENNSYLVANIA ACTIVISTS UNITED — $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetUniversity of Nevada Reno Foundation — $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHuman Rights Coalition — $20,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetSowega Rising — $18,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetHISPANIC FEDERATION INC — $17,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALL VOTING IS LOCAL ACTION — $17,189 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetPASTORS UNITED COMMUNITY ADVOCACY INC — $16,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetCOMMITTEE OF SEVENTY — $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCOUNT MI VOTE EDUCATION FUND — $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetTHE ANDREW GOODMAN FOUNDATION INC — $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSTATE INNOVATION EXCHANGE — $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFREEDOM RIGHTEOUS ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE — $12,500 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetLEADERS IN TRAINING — $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetACTION TANK — $10,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetCASA IN ACTION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetUNITED WAY OF SOUTHERN NEVADA — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSTATE DEMOCRACY PROJECT — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMigrant Equity Southeast Inc — $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetNATIONAL KOREAN AMERICAN SERVICE AND EDUCATION CONSORTIUM INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

New Venture FundAmalgamated Charitabl…Tides FoundationNEO Philanthropy IncWindward FundClean and Prosperous …Proteus Fund IncState VoicesHopewell FundBvm Capacity Building…State Power FundWay to Rise
New Venture FundDC48.2× affinity28 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: New Venture Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Windward Fund · Clean and Prosperous America · Proteus Fund Inc · State Voices · Hopewell Fund · Bvm Capacity Building Institute Inc · State Power Fund · Way to Rise

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 All Voting Is Local 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Alianza Center Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 75 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines