Skip to content

· Public charity

Center for Voter Information

To increase civic engagement among under-represented communities including unmarried women, people of color, and young people, as well as people who share the values of increasing the participation of such communities.

$5.3M
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$4.9M
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, FY2020 to 2024.

Public Benefit$5.5MHealth$1.3MCivil Rights$1.1MEmployment$700kEnvironment$500kAnimals$100kCrime & Legal$6k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$4,900,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$7.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YOUR COMMUNITY PAC INC$4,900,000
DEMOCRACY MATTERS FOUNDATION$375,000
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 (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%YOUR COMMUNITY PAC INC: $4.9M → 10%ANNIE'S LIST TRAINING AND ENGAGEMENT FUND: $250k → 10%DEMOCRACY MATTERS FOUNDATION: $375k → 14%NATURAL MEDICINE COLORADO: $1.3M → 12%BLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITION: $1.0M → 14%THE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC: $6k → 14%SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $500k → 14%AMERICA VOTES: $15k → 14%WORKING AMERICA: $700k → 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 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
Democracy Matters

Democracy matters was formed to connect and build a community of pro-democracy donors.

Civil Rights
2
Make Elections Fair Inc

Advocacy and passage of initiatives to eliminate the partisan primary to allow all voters to vote in the primary for any candidate.

—
3
Network for Civic Action

Network for civic action advocates for the protection of democracy and encourages civic engagement. it evaluates programs and educates donors about how their donations can best serve those goals.

—
4
Guarantee Our Votes Project

Protect voting rights in the united states for all citizens and expand voting rights to citizens who have been historically disenfranchised or under-represented in the electoral process.

Civil Rights
5
All Americans Vote

All Americans Vote aims to motivate underrepresented Americans to engage in the most patriotic of exercises - voting!

Civil Rights
6
American Workers for Progress

American workers for progress works to ensure that leaders at every level are focused on reducing barriers to job growth and addressing economic challenges to guarantee a better future for all americans.

—
7
America Votes Education Fund

America Votes Education Fund is dedicated to expanding all voters' access to the ballot through a grantmaking program.

Civil Rights
8
Working America Action

Working america action is organized for the purposes of economic justice and democracy

—
9
American Policy Coalition

With a commitment to free market principles, APC focuses on educating the public about conservative fiscal policies that foster job growth, a stronger economy, and increased opportunity for all Americans.

Public Benefit
10
Organize for Justice

Organize for justice develops diverse campaign leadership by passing on innovations and relationships from one generation of organizers to the next. the organization strives to create public support on issues affecting working americans.

—
11
Focus for Democracy Action

Focus for democracy action is dedicated to empowering donors to make the most impactful contributions possible to strengthen democracy.

—
12
Majority Forward

The organization's mission is to advocate for progressive policies and engaging in nonpartisan voter registration.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Campaign Legal Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Annie's List Training and Engagement Fund. 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

10 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. 10 of the 11 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
3/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

YOUR COMMUNITY PAC: $4,900,000 · OtherYOUR COMMUNITY PACNATURAL MEDICINE COLORADO DBA ROCKY MTN VOTER GUIDE: $1,322,500 · OtherNATURAL MEDICINE COLORADO DBA ROCKY MTN VOTER GUIDEBLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITION: $1,000,000 · OtherBLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITIONWORKING AMERICA: $700,000 · OtherWORKING AMERICA+2 more: $190,000 · OtherSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $500,000 · EnvironmentDEMOCRACY MATTERS FOUNDATION: $375,000 · Civil RightsAnnie's List Training and Engagement Fund: $250,000 · Community ImprovementAmerica Votes: $15,000 · Community ImprovementTHE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC: $6,250 · Crime & Legal
Other$8,112,500Environment$500,000Civil Rights$375,000Community Improvement$265,000Crime & Legal$6,250

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 budgetNATURAL MEDICINE COLORADO DBA ROCKY MTN VOTER GUIDE: $1,322,500 over 1y, 23% of budgetWORKING AMERICA: $700,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $500,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDEMOCRACY MATTERS FOUNDATION: $375,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetAnnie's List Training and Engagement Fund: $250,000 over 1y, 34% of budgetMONTANA HUNTERS AND ANGLERS ACTION: $100,000 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetFUTURE MAJORITY INC: $90,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAmerica Votes: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC: $6,250 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Future Now ActionDC13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Future Now Action · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Tides Foundation

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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, FY20–25
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Center for Voter Information?

    Find your warmest path to Center for Voter Information 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 11 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Center for Voter Information’s filings →

    More from the funding graph