· Public charity
Black Voters Matter Fund Inc
Our goal is to increase power in our communities through effective voting.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 10 grants below total $202,400 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $363,685 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $161,285 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 $10k2 grants · $11k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $135k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $56k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Commonwealth Alliance Voter Engagement | $56,000 |
| One Fair Wage Action Inc | $30,000 |
| Mississippi Votes | $30,000 |
| Action St Louis Power Project | $25,000 |
| The Working Families Party | $20,000 |
| Black Youth Vote Kalamazoo | $10,000 |
| Mothers of Hope | $10,000 |
| Faith for Black Lives Action | $10,000 |
| Ladder Strategies and Solutions | $6,000 |
| Crystal Mason The Fight | $5,400 |
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 (FY18–24, $71k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% 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.
27 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 24 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, 27% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $147k 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
- WFWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC2× · 2023–2024 · $95k · revenue +11%
- MFMemphis for All2× · 2020–2021 · $60k · revenue +673%
- 1P1HOOD POWER2× · 2021–2022 · $55k · revenue +289%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $155k
- ACADVANCE CAROLINA INCone grant, 2021 · $100k
- FFixSAPDone grant, 2021 · $75k
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.
Civic Engagement for the Haitian Community
Our goal is to increase power in our communities through effective voting. We increase voter registration and help develop voting infrastructure and to pursue policies that expands access to the ballot.
Aggressively concentrating on giving Black Americans a fundamental base that will help electrify them to vote through our community organizing, voter registration drives, canvassing voters and mobilization.
To ensure that working class people are educated on their voting rights. The coalition engages in mobilization and educational information sessions to ensure that all workers voices are heard.
Voter education around policy
Black in Action Collective exists to build Black political power to transform systems and radically reimagine what is possible for ourselves, our families, and our communities
Voter engagement
Minnesota Voice is a collaboration of organizations working toward permanent change in social, racial, and economic justice by increasing civic engagement and voter participation across the state.
Ci action fund will advocate for issues that improve outcomes for youth, immigrants, and black, indigenous, hispanic, disabled and youth of color (bihdyoc)
Empower people and strengthen democratic institutions
We prioritize the needs of Black people through two programs: Disability Justice and Reproductive Justice. We believe that supporting mental healthcare, holding and creating space for vulnerability is a piece of how we free ourselves as…
People Power and Light (PPL) is an organization dedicated to developing a healthy and vibrant economy in Louisiana, particularly in those areas devastated by the petrochemical industry. The primary purpose of PPL is to engage with people…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mississippi Coalition On Black Civic Participation and the most unlike its peers is Embrace Foundation. 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 9 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 19% of your grantees by number, and just 22% of your money.
The orgs you fund close more than the field — 13% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
60 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. 60 of the 213 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 ACTION ST LOUIS POWER PROJECT ↗
- Who funds WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC ↗
- Who funds Act 4 SA ↗
- Who funds Memphis for All ↗
- Who funds COMMONWEALTH ALLIANCE VOTER ENGAGEMENT ↗
- Who funds 1HOOD POWER ↗
- Who funds QUITMAN COUNTY DEVELOPMENT ORG ↗
- Who funds POWER COALITION FOR EQUITY AND JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Foundation for Social Impact ↗
- Who funds PEOPLES ADVOCACY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Yes 4 Minneapolis Education Fund ↗
- Who funds UNITE HERE ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds PONTIAC POLICY ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds America Votes ↗
- Who funds F&L ORGANIZATIONAL SUPPORT SERVICES ↗
- Who funds NEXT GENERATION ACTION NETWORK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MOTHERS OF HOPE ↗
- Who funds MISSISSIPPI VOTES ACTION FUND CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds ONE FAIR WAGE ACTION 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: Bvm Capacity Building Institute Inc · Tides Advocacy · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Clean and Prosperous America · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · America Votes · Tides Foundation · Jessie Smith Noyes Foundation · NAACP Empowerment Programs Inc · Pro-Democracy Campaign · Way to Win Action Fund Inc
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 Black Voters Matter Fund Inc 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.
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 Black Voters Matter Fund Inc?
Find your warmest path to Black Voters Matter Fund Inc 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.