Loading…
· Public charity
ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM
ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM exists to keep the door open for the (continued on schedule o)gospel by advancing every person's god-given right to live and speak the truth.
$12M
Granted FY2025
37
Grants
23
Communities
$8.7M
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 80% of ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2019
liberty sanctityculturalchristianbiblicalstudentstrainingpatrick henry
2020
christianbiblicalstudentstrainingpatrick henry
2021
sanctity religiousparental rights
2022
actionissueseducationalabortionsmithresearchworks
2023
marriagesmithparental rightshealthdefendfirmeducation
2025
groupvalues religiousbodanzaheritagemarriagellpparental rights
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2025 · 37 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $36k
- $10k–50k26 grants · $532k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $307k
- $250k+2 grants · $9.6M
$20,000
Median grant
23
States reached
$112M
Total assets
Largest grants
- ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM INTERNATIONAL$8,715,495
- ADF ACTION$900,000
- ENVISAGE LAW$96,852
- CONSOVOY MCCARTHY PLLC$80,219
- LIBERTY COUNSEL$75,000
- BOYDEN GRAY PLLC$55,000
- ETHICS AND PUBLIC POLICY CENTER$47,800
- DILLON PLLC$31,833
- SIMMS SHOWERS LLP$31,637
- FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP$30,351
- BODANZA & BODANZA LAW OFFICE$30,000
- HOSTETTER LAW GROUP LLP$28,000
- WADLEIGH STARR & PETERS PLLC$27,726
- BURKE LAW GROUP$25,066
- CHILD & PARENTAL RIGHTS CAMPAIGN$25,000
02The need
04
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 (FY23–23, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6% — the area typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
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, United Way ALICE — 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.
36%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$5.7M · 44 repeat orgs$10M to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +118% since the first grant, against +42% for the ones you funded once.
44 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 34 since wound down; 27 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
44
41
Total granted
$5.7M
$993k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+118%
+42%
Still filing today
41%
37%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 10% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9.4M went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Civil RightsEducationReligionCrime & LegalHealthArts & 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
- ALAmerican Liberties Institute2× · 2018–2019 · $340k · revenue +450% · 46% of their budget
- TFThe Family Foundation of Virginia3× · 2020–2023 · $252k · revenue +84%
- CPChild & Parental Rights Campaign4× · 2021–2025 · $243k · revenue +818%
Funded once
- CLCharis Lex PCone grant, 2021 · $160k
- CCCounty Citizens Defending Freedom - USA Foundation Incgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue +240%
- DKDeForest Koscelnik & Berardinellione grant, 2023 · $50k
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
Lawfare Institute
Produce scientific content on lawfare and the analysis of emblematic cases of the phenomenon through publication of the lawfare website, podcasts and related media.
Public Benefit
2
The National Center for Law and Policy
NCLP is a legal defense organization which focuses on the protection and promotion of religious freedom, the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, parental rights, and other civil liberties.
Civil Rights
3
First Liberty Institute
First Liberty Institute provides pro bono legal services to advance and defend religious liberty for individuals, churches, and other ministries and organizations
Civil Rights
4
Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty
The mission of the Acton Institute is to promote a free and virtuous society characterized by individual liberty and sustained by religious principles.
Civil Rights
5
American Center for Law and Justice -District of Columbia Inc
engaged in litigation; performed legal research; issued legal opinions; delivered public speeches; participated in public forums & broadcast interviews & wrote articles in defense of religious freedom & against religious discrimination;…
Civil Rights
6
Family Research Council
Our vision is a culture in which all human life is valued, families flourish, and religious liberty thrives.
Human Services
7
Center for Law and Policy
The Center for Law and Policy (CLP) is a public policy organization dedicated to promoting and defending liberty, equality before the law, and the sovereignty of the states. To this end, CLP promotes open discussion with state attorneys…
Arts & Culture
8
The Center for American Liberty
The center for american liberty leads the fight for free speech and civil liberties across the country. by leveraging its nationwide network of litigators, the center for american liberty zealously advocates on behalf of individuals whose…
Crime & Legal
9
Americans United for Life Inc
AUL is an organization that advances the human right to life in culture, law, and policy.
Civil Rights
10
International Catholic Jurists Forum Inc
The International Catholic Jurists Forum (ICJF) was established to produce, compile, and share resources on fundamental human rights under attack in the regional and international human rights protection systems. It operates as a forum for…
Religion
11
American Civil Liberties Union of
To promote civil liberties through communication and interaction with and between the citizens and legislators of the state of florida
Civil Rights
12
Aclu Foundation of Texas Inc
To be Texas' foremost champion of individual rights & freedoms through education & litigation.
Civil Rights
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fidelis Center for Law & Policy and the most unlike its peers is Open Doors With Brother Andrew 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.
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
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 18 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 9% of your grantees by number, and just 84% of your money.
Closures · last 5 years
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.
orgs you fund
0.9%1/112
the rest of the field
11%
5,477/50,356
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.
05the grantee network
38 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
18
Early backer (in before they grew)
35/38
Grantees still filing
30/38
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$13,033,696Civil Rights$1,944,609Education$558,004Crime & Legal$308,125Public Benefit$151,800Religion$87,518Arts & Culture$60,850
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 ADF Action ↗
- Who funds Freedom of Conscience Defense Fund ↗
- Who funds American Liberties Institute ↗
- Who funds The Family Foundation of Virginia ↗
- Who funds Child & Parental Rights Campaign ↗
- Who funds Fidelis Center for Law and Policy ↗
- Who funds Ethics and Public Policy Center ↗
- Who funds Susan B Anthony List ↗
- Who funds Patrick Henry College ↗
- Who funds Religious Freedom Institute ↗
- Who funds Women's Libertation Front ↗
- Who funds American Freedom Law Center ↗
- Who funds Abigail Adams Institute ↗
- Who funds The Claremont Institute ↗
- Who funds Indiana Family Institute ↗
- Who funds Roads of Success ↗
- Who funds Home School Foundation ↗
- Who funds County Citizens Defending Freedom - USA Foundation 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.
Bradley Impact Fund IncWI20.6× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Bradley Impact Fund Inc · Donors Trust Inc · Knights of Columbus Charitable Fund Inc · Servant Foundation · The Catholic Association Foundation · Christian Community Foundation Inc · Chattanooga Christian Community · Johnson Charitable Gift Fund · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · National Philanthropic Trust
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 organisation ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM 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
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: American Liberties Institute.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~33 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 6 filed years.
Track record & reputation
high risk
6 years of Form 990 filings, no recent filing; revenue up 5.5× since.
Legal standing
medium risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 593309465 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on American Liberties Institute, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 33 months of cash on hand.
- FlagSustained operations— No recent filing on record.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 46% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Alliance Defending Freedom?
Find your warmest path to Alliance Defending Freedom through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
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