Skip to content

· 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.

$543k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$185k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Civil Rights$829kPublic Benefit$453kCrime & Legal$200kHealth$128kCommunity Improvement$68kEnvironment$39kPhilanthropy$28k
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $232k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $290k
$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
SEMILLA ACTION$17,000
ACT BLUE$17,000
NMVC ACTION FUND$10,000
EMERGE NEW MEXICO$10,000
SPEAKER FUND$10,000
CONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO$9,000
CINDY NAVA FOR NEW MEXICO$5,500
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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 45% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 15%ACT BLUE: $17k → 16%WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION: $230k → 20%NMVC ACTION FUND: $10k → 10%CONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO: $9k → 12%SOUTHWEST WOMENS LAW CENTER: $185k → 14%NO CORPORATE DEMOCRATS PAC: $205k → 23%ACT BLUE: $11k → 16%WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION: $85k → 20%CINDY NAVA FOR NEW MEXICO: $6k → 10%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF NM: $72k → 14%NO CORPORATE DEMOCRATS PAC: $77k → 23%WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION: $20k → 20%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF NM: $45k → 14%CAF ACCION: $55k → 23%SOUTHWEST WOMENS LAW CENTER: $15k → 14%NO CORPORATE DEMOCRATS PAC: $25k → 23%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF NM: $11k → 14%NEW MEXICO NATIVE VOTE: $10k → 14%NEW MEXICO NATIVE VOTE: $10k → 14%ORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTME: $105k → 14%ORGANIZERS IN LAND OF ENCHANTMENT: $75k → 14%VOTE YES FOR KIDS: $75k → 14%EL CENTRO PODER Y ACCION: $50k → 14%PROGRESS NOW NM: $35k → 14%DREAMS IN ACTION NM: $30k → 14%ORGANIZERS IN LAND OF ENCHANTMENT: $27k → 14%DREAMS IN ACTION NM: $23k → 14%ORGANIZERS IN LAND OF ENCHANTMENT: $20k → 14%SEMILLA ACTION: $17k → 14%ORGANIZERS IN LAND OF ENCHANTMENT: $13k → 14%NO CORPORATE COUNCIL MFC: $8k → 14%SIERRA CLUB RIO GRANDE CHAPTER: $20k → 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.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 8 repeat orgs$342k to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
5

Total granted

$1.4M
$195k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
+47%

Still filing today

75%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $148k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’20’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsCommunity ImprovementYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • WF
    WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $335k · revenue +11%
  • OI
    ORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT
    5× · 2018–2025 · $315k · revenue +106%
  • SA
    SEMILLA ACTION
    3× · 2023–2025 · $70k · revenue +52%

Funded once

  • NC
    NO CORPORATE COUNCIL MFC
    one grant, 2022 · $60k
  • CA
    Cafe Acciongraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $55k · revenue +47%
  • EC
    EL CENTRO PODER Y ACCION
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -49%
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
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. to educate the public about social welfare issues that impact…

Civil Rights
2
Nm Voters First

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…

Public Benefit
3
El Centro De Igualdad Y Derechos

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.

Human Services
4
New Mexico Foundation for Open Government

To ensure that government is accountable to the voters and taxpayers.

Crime & Legal
5
Nm Comunidades En Accion Y De Fe

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.

Human Services
6
Law Access New Mexico

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.

—
7
Our Voice Nuestra Voz

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…

Human Services
8
New Mexico Safety Over Profit

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,…

Health
9
Community Power New Mexico
Community Improvement
10
Conservation Voters New Mexico

To hold elected officials accountable for their environmental votes and to educate voters on conservation issues.

—
11
American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico Foundation

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.

—
12
Somos Accion

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…

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is El Centro Poder Y Accion; 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.
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 21 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
5/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NO CORPORATE DEMOCRATS PAC: $307,000 · OtherNO CORPORATE DEMOCRATS PACPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF NM: $128,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF NMSEMILLA ACTION: $69,685 · OtherSEMILLA ACTIONNO CORPORATE COUNCIL MFC: $60,000 · OtherNO CORPORATE COUNCIL MFCVERDE VOTERS PAC: $48,000 · OtherVERDE VOTERS PACACTBLUE CIVICS INC: $27,500 · Other+7 more: $95,035 · Other+7 moreWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $335,000 · Civil RightsWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INCSOUTHWEST WOMEN'S LAW CENTER: $200,000 · Civil RightsSOUTHWEST WOMEN'S LAW CENTERCafe Accion: $55,000 · Civil RightsCafe AccionEL CENTRO PODER Y ACCION: $50,000 · Civil RightsEL CENTRO PODER Y ACCIONPROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO: $35,000 · Civil Rights+1 more: $9,000 · Civil RightsORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT: $315,000 · Community ImprovementORGANIZERS IN THE LA…NMVC Action Fund: $10,000 · Youth Development
Other$735,220Civil Rights$684,000Community Improvement$315,000Youth Development$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $335,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT: $315,000 over 5y, 7.3% of budgetSOUTHWEST WOMEN'S LAW CENTER: $200,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetSEMILLA ACTION: $69,685 over 3y, 4.4% of budgetEL CENTRO PODER Y ACCION: $50,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetPROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO: $35,000 over 1y, 9.3% of budgetACTBLUE CIVICS INC: $27,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetNM NATIVE VOTE: $20,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetNMVC Action Fund: $10,000 over 1y, 2.9% 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 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 ↗

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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

North FundDC15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: North Fund · America Votes · Grove Action Fund · Energy Action Fund · Sixteen Thirty Fund

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 Center for Civic Action funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Center for Civic Action. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    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.

    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 21 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 Center for Civic Action’s filings →

    More from the funding graph