How much did CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY grant in FY2023?

CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY reported 13 grants totaling $951,923 in its FY2023 IRS filing.

Where is CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY based?

CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY is based in NM.

CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY

Foundation Dossiers Mostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →

· Public charity

CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY

The purpose of the organization is to research, develop and analyze current and future public policies that impact the health and welfare of new mexicans, such as health care, energy, natural resources, the economy, jobs, voting rights issues and to increase civic participation.

$952k

Granted FY2023

Grants

Communities

$281k

Largest

01What you fund

0195% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2023.

Civil Rights$1.5MHuman Services$1.1MCommunity Improvement$356kReligion$317kPublic Benefit$117kEducation$82kHealth$70kArts & Culture$45kEnvironment$33kOther$180k

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

prebold futuresmakeeducateworkers

2020

gapsdream worksworkerschildrenlatino immigrant

2021

nonpartisanindigenousyoungcommon causegovernmentconservationorgan mountains-desert

2022

blackconservationorgan mountains-desertmountains-desert peaksleadershipgapsadvocacy

2023

buildingclassgapsseeksyouthdream workseducate

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2023 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

$10k–50k7 grants · $147k
$50k–250k5 grants · $512k
$250k+1 grant · $281k

$34,000

Median grant

States reached

$11M

Total assets

Largest grants

OLE EDUCATION FUND$281,386
NEW MEXICO DREAM TEAM$153,400
PROGRESS NOW NEW MEXICO EDUCATION F$97,500
NEW MEXICO ASIAN FAMILY CENTER$91,217
NEW MEXICO COMMUNITY CAPITAL$90,000
EVERY VOICE CENTER$80,000
PARTNERSHIP FOR COMMUNITY ACTION$34,000
NM COMUNIDADES EN ACCION Y DE FE$32,500
SIERRA CLUB$20,000
DREAMS IN ACTION NM$20,000
WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC$20,000
EL CENTRO DE IGUALDAD Y DERECHOS$10,000
NATIVE AMERICANS VOTER ALLIANCE$10,000

02The need

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 (FY18–23, $909k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19% — the area typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$3.1M · 14 repeat orgs$657k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +222% since the first grant, against +43% for the ones you funded once.

14 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2023, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$3.1M

$503k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+222%

+43%

Still filing today

100%

86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $154k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitEnvironmentArts & 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

OE
OLE EDUCATION FUND
6× · 2018–2023 · $895k · revenue +178%
NC
NM COMUNIDADES EN ACCION Y DE FE
6× · 2018–2023 · $496k · revenue +223% · 56% of their budget
NM
NEW MEXICO DREAM TEAM
3× · 2020–2023 · $317k · revenue +951% · 33% of their budget

Funded once

NM
NEW MEXICO NOW
one grant, 2019 · $90k · revenue -99%
NI
NACA INSPIRED SCHOOLS NETWORKgraduated
one grant, 2021 · $82k · revenue +369%
AN
AFT NEW MEXICOgraduated
one grant, 2019 · $75k · revenue +37%

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.

New Mexico Child Advocacy Networks

Nmcan partners with young people to build community, promote equity and lead change.

—

American Civil Liberties Union of

Aclu of nm foundation's purpose is to protect and advance justice, liberty, and equity as guaranteed by the constitutions of new mexico and the united states.

—

New Mexico First

The mission of new mexico first is to be a nonpartisan catalyst for positive change by conducting independent research, engaging new mexicans in policy, and enabling action.

—

Dual Language Education of New

To champion equitable educational opportunities that honor and leverage the diverse linguistic and cultural assets of every learner. defender oportunidades educativas equitativas que honren y aprovechen los diversos recursos lingsticos y…

Education

Conservation Voters New Mexico

Cvnm education fund is a statewide, nonpartisan nonprofit committed to engaging the people of new mexico in our long-standing shared values of protecting our air, land, water, and the health of our communities.

Civil Rights

New Mexico Families Forward

New mexico families forward (nmff) is focused on educating the public about issues such as voting rights, sustainable revenue, improving public schools, and increasing access to affordable healthcare and better payng jobs.

Civil Rights

Nm Native Vote

Our mission is to build a native american vote bloc that will actively promote a native american agenda.

—

Northeastern New Mexico Educational

To provide leadership, build partnerships and enable the innovation necessary to reestablish local food and energy production, strengthen educational systems and establish placemaking in our communities while promoting northeastern new…

Arts & Culture

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

New Mexico Foundation

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

Crime & Legal

Enlace Comunatario

Enlace comunitario transforms lives of individuals and their families experiencing domestic violence by working to decrease gender inequity and intimate partner violence in the latino immigrant community in central new mexico. enlace…

Community Improvement

New Mexico Coalition Against

The coalition's mission is to improve the response to and reduce the impact of domestic violence in new mexico.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Partnership for Community Action and the most unlike its peers is Angelica Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 24 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

3%1/32

the rest of the field

10%

2,045/20,657

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

31 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

30/31

Grantees still filing

26/31

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Civil Rights$1,471,565Human Services$1,109,617Community Improvement$356,100Religion$317,400Other$328,075Public Benefit$117,000Education$81,953

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.

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.

Santa Fe Community FoundationNM36.4× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Santa Fe Community Foundation · WK Kellogg Foundation · Con Alma Health Foundation Inc · Albuquerque Community Foundation · Marshall L and Perrine D McCune · New Mexico Fund for Women and Girls · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · Western Conservation Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Community Foundation of Southern

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 CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY 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

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%

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: NM COMUNIDADES EN ACCION Y DE FE.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~40 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 3.2× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 273310051 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 NM COMUNIDADES EN ACCION Y DE FE, 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 40 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 56% 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 Center for Civic Policy?

Find your warmest path to Center for Civic Policy 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.

CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

31 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Center for Civic Policy?

More from the funding graph

CENTER FOR CIVIC POLICY

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

31 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Center for Civic Policy?

More from the funding graph