· Public charity
Center for Civic Action
To advocate for policies that impact the common good and welfare of new mexicans, such as health care, energy, natural resources, the economy and jobs, and voting rights issues.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $15k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $232k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $290k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SOUTHWEST WOMENS LAW CENTER | $185,000 |
| ORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTME | $105,000 |
| VERDE VOTERS PAC | $48,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF NM | $45,000 |
| PROGRESS NOW NM | $35,000 |
| WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION | $20,000 |
| SIERRA CLUB RIO GRANDE CHAPTER | $20,000 |
| ACT BLUE | $17,000 |
| SEMILLA ACTION | $17,000 |
| EMERGE NEW MEXICO | $10,000 |
| NMVC ACTION FUND | $10,000 |
| SPEAKER FUND | $10,000 |
| CONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO | $9,000 |
| CINDY NAVA FOR NEW MEXICO | $5,500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 45% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
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.
8 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $148k 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 INC3× · 2023–2025 · $335k · revenue +11%
- OIORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT5× · 2018–2025 · $315k · revenue +106%
- SASEMILLA ACTION3× · 2023–2025 · $70k · revenue +52%
Funded once
- NCNO CORPORATE COUNCIL MFCone grant, 2022 · $60k
- CACafe Acciongraduatedone grant, 2023 · $55k · revenue +47%
- ECEL CENTRO PODER Y ACCIONone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -49%
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.
To advocate for policies that impact the common good and welfare of new mexicans, such as health care, energy, natural resources, the economy and jobs, and voting rights issues. to educate the public about social welfare issues that impact…
NM Voters First (NMVF) was incorporated in 2024 with the mission to support candidates tha believe in empowering and enhancing democracy and encouraging legislators to support fair and equitable elections that expand peoples political…
El centro de igualdad y derechos is a civil rights and workers justice organization based in central new mexico that combines organizing, leadership development, information campaigns, and policy education.
To ensure that government is accountable to the voters and taxpayers.
CAFE is a faith based Non Profit community organization with the purpose of training and organizing low and moderate income families to shape public policy.
Provide respectful high quality legal advice, counsel, brief services and referral to low-income New Mexicans and help remove barriers to the civil justice system.
We are a values-driven advocacy organization committed to defending and expanding consumer protections, corporate and insurance accountability, and access to justice in New Mexico. Our work is led by consumers, survivors of sexual assault,…
Our Voice Nuestra Voice is a nation-building organization, anchoring ancestry while building Black and Brown solidarity in New Orleans. We remember our shared culture and language, reconnect to the land, and organize our community around…
To hold elected officials accountable for their environmental votes and to educate voters on conservation issues.
Aclu of nm foundation is the state affiliate of alcu, the nation's premier civil rights and civil liberties organization. our purpose is to protect and advance justice, liberty, and equity.
Somos accion's mission is to build a community that does not discriminate against people based on their national origin, that institutes humane migration policies, and that protects the rights of everyone. somos accion intends to…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is El Centro Poder Y Accion and the most unlike its peers is Organizers in the Land of Enchantment. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 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. 11 of the 21 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 WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC ↗
- Who funds ORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT ↗
- Who funds SOUTHWEST WOMEN'S LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds SEMILLA ACTION ↗
- Who funds Cafe Accion ↗
- Who funds EL CENTRO PODER Y ACCION ↗
- Who funds PROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO ↗
- Who funds ACTBLUE CIVICS INC ↗
- Who funds NM NATIVE VOTE ↗
- Who funds NMVC Action Fund ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO EDUCATION FUND ↗
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: North Fund · America Votes · Grove Action Fund · Energy Action Fund · Sixteen Thirty Fund
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 Center for Civic Action 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 Center for Civic Action?
Find your warmest path to Center for Civic Action 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.