Skip to content
California Charter Schools Association Advocates at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

California Charter Schools Association Advocates

To increase the involvement of the charter school community in the political process, create a pipeline of charter school supporters and activitists, endorse and support public officials who are committed to california charter public schools, and grow the political influence of the california charter school movement.

$89k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$32k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$874kPublic Benefit$631kCivil Rights$124kCommunity Improvement$25k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $77,250, the rows itemized in this filing. The $88,750 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $11,500 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 · $15k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $62k
$30,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$3.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION$32,250
MAGGY'S CAMPAIGN FOR CHOICE$30,000
BLANCA PACHECOS MOVING CALIFORNIA FORWARD BALLOT MEASURE COMMITTEE$7,500
CALIFORNIANS FOR JUSTICE A COMMITTEE CONTROLLED BY JESSE GABRIEL$7,500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 98% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Keep Los Altos Schools Strong Yes on GG: $8k → 8%For the Future of West County Children: $30k → 9%CALIFORNIA ACTION: $11k → 10%Friends of Oakland Public Schools: $70k → 10%GOVERNOR'S INAUGURAL FUND 2019: $50k → 12%SPEAK UP: $30k → 14%PROGRESSCA CO THE KAL GROUP: $25k → 19%Save Our City Alameda No on B1 2016: $35k → 10%MAGGY'S CAMPAIGN FOR CHOICE: $30k → 12%SPEAK UP: $20k → 14%Friends of Chico Schools Yes on K 2016: $30k → 10%2023 GOVERNOR'S INAUGURAL FUND: $25k → 12%GUARDIANS OF OUR COMMUNITIES: $8k → 14%SPEAKER 2023 INAUGURAL FUND: $25k → 12%California Charter Schools Association: $250k → 14%RUBIO FIGHTING FOR CALIFORNIA BALLOT MEASURE COMMITTEE: $13k → 12%CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION: $175k → 14%RUBIO FIGHTING FOR CALIFORNIA BALLOT MEASURE COMMITTEE: $10k → 12%California Charter Schools Association: $140k → 14%CALIFORNIA PROBLEM SOLVERS ACTION FUND: $10k → 12%CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION: $140k → 14%BLANCA PACHECOS MOVING CALIFORNIA FORWARD BALLOT MEASURE COMMITTEE: $8k → 12%CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION: $88k → 14%CITIZENS FOR EAST SIDE SCHOOLS - YES ON MEASURE G: $25k → 12%Californians for a 21st Century Economy: $20k → 14%Families for Sacramento City Schools: $15k → 12%Equality California: $50k → 14%SAFETY AND LEARNING FOR OUR SCHOOLS YES ON MEASURE YY: $175k → 12%CALIFORNIA LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS POLICY INSTITUTE: $15k → 14%CALIFORNIANS FOR JUSTICE A COMMITTEE CONTROLLED BY JESSE GABRIEL: $8k → 14%CALIFORNIA LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS POLICY INSTITUTE: $6k → 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.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$997k · 4 repeat orgs$656k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +18% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
17

Total granted

$997k
$611k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
0%

Still filing today

100%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 42% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $45k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25
EducationCivil RightsPublic BenefitOther
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

  • CC
    CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION
    7× · 2017–2025 · $903k · revenue -43%
  • SU
    SPEAK UP
    2× · 2020–2022 · $50k · revenue -98%
  • CL
    CALIFORNIA LGBTQ FOUNDATION
    2× · 2022–2023 · $23k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • SL
    Safety & Learning for Our Schools
    one grant, 2019 · $175k
  • FO
    Friends of Oakland Public Schools
    one grant, 2017 · $70k
  • GI
    GOVERNORS INAUGURAL FUND 2019
    one grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue -100%
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
Californians for Safe Drinking Water and

Authorize Bond for Vote on 2018 Ballot

—
2
Californians to Stop Higher Property Taxes

To educate the public and policy makers about the history and purpose of California's property tax law.

—
3
Californians Against Higher Taxes

Communications to Californians on state legislation that expands taxation

—
4
Californians for Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability

To support policies and ballot measures to curb increases in taxes throughout the state of California, including the qualification and passage of a proposed statewide initiative relating to the imposition of taxes and fees (California…

—
5
The California Endowment
Philanthropy
6
California Research Project

To conduct socio-economic demographic research, analysis, and advocacy related to communities of interest and voting rights in California.

—
7
Govern for California

The specific and primary purpose of Govern for California is to promote social welfare by improving the democratic process and the performance of government through policy reforms in election rules through education of candidates and…

Civil Rights
8
Equality California Issues Pac

To support and oppose issues affecting LGBTQ+ civil rights in California.

—
9
Governor Newsoms Ballot Measure Committee

To support or oppose ballot measures in California.

—
10
Pta California Congress of Parents Teachers & Students Inc

Support elementary school education

—
11
California Problem Solvers Foundation
Social Science
12
California Water Alliance
Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is California Charter Schools Association; the most unlike its peers is ProgressCA. 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

11 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. 11 of the 24 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/11
Grantees still filing
3/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION: $902,650 · EducationCALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATIONSPEAK UP: $50,471 · Education+1 more: $23,000 · EducationSafety & Learning for Our Schools: $175,000 · OtherSafety & Learning for Our SchoolsFriends of Oakland Public Schools: $70,000 · OtherFriends of Oakland Public SchoolsSave Our City Alameda No on B1 2016: $35,000 · OtherSave Our City Alameda No on B1 2016Friends of Chico Schools Yes on K 2016: $30,000 · OtherFriends of Chico Schools Yes on K 2016MAGGY'S CAMPAIGN FOR CHOICE: $30,000 · OtherMAGGY'S CAMPAIGN FOR CHOICEFor the Future of West County Children: $30,000 · OtherFor the Future of West County ChildrenCITIZENS FOR EAST SIDE SCHOOLS - YES ON MEASURE G: $25,000 · OtherSPEAKER 2023 INAUGURAL FUND: $25,000 · OtherProgressCA: $25,000 · Other2023 Governors Inaugural Fund: $25,000 · OtherCalifornians for a 21st Century Economy: $20,000 · Other+7 more: $65,825 · Other+7 moreEQUALITY CALIFORNIA: $50,000 · Civil RightsTHE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS POLICY INSTITUTE: $21,000 · Civil RightsGOVERNORS INAUGURAL FUND 2019: $50,000 · Public Benefit
Education$976,121Other$555,825Civil Rights$71,000Public Benefit$50,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION: $902,650 over 7y, 1.7% of budgetSPEAK UP: $50,471 over 2y, 18% of budgetGOVERNORS INAUGURAL FUND 2019: $50,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetEQUALITY CALIFORNIA: $50,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budget2023 Governors Inaugural Fund: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCALIFORNIA LGBTQ FOUNDATION: $23,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetTHE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS POLICY INSTITUTE: $21,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetCalifornia Problem Solvers Action Fund: $10,000 over 1y, 11% 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.

  • Who funds CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds Safety & Learning for Our Schools ↗
  • Who funds SPEAK UP ↗
  • Who funds GOVERNORS INAUGURAL FUND 2019 ↗
  • Who funds EQUALITY CALIFORNIA ↗
  • Who funds ProgressCA ↗
  • Who funds 2023 Governors Inaugural Fund ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA LGBTQ FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA ACTION ↗
  • Who funds California Problem Solvers Action Fund ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

California Chamber of…
California Chamber of CommerceCA15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Chamber of Commerce

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 California Charter Schools Association Advocates funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from California Charter Schools Association Advocates. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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.

    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 24 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 California Charter Schools Association Advocates’ 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