Skip to content
Center of the American Experiment at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Center of the American Experiment

Center of the American Experiment is a nonpartisan public policy and educational institution that brings conservative and free market ideas to bear on the hardest problems facing Minnesota and the nation.

$50k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Public Benefit$1.4MCrime & Legal$1.1MCivil Rights$723kEducation$624kHuman Services$167k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Upper Midwest Law Center$50,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY21–23, $68k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%TakeCharge: $35k → 11%TakeCharge: $20k → 11%TakeCharge: $13k → 11%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.9M · 12 repeat orgs$110k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +57% since the first grant, against -52% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
2

Total granted

$3.9M
$110k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%
-52%

Still filing today

100%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Public BenefitEducationCrime & LegalCivil RightsHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • TP
    TURNING POINT USA INC
    6× · 2018–2023 · $664k · revenue +967%
  • UM
    UPPER MIDWEST LAW CENTER
    6× · 2019–2025 · $610k · revenue +258% · 31% of their budget
  • PU
    PRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
    5× · 2019–2023 · $564k · revenue +222%

Funded once

  • SJ
    Schaerr Jaffe
    one grant, 2024 · $100k
  • MP
    MINNESOTA PARENTS ALLIANCE
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -52%
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
Institute for Public Accuracy

To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.

Arts & Culture
2
Washington Monthly Institute

Dedicated to increasing public knowledge through washington monthly magazine and website www.washingtonmonthly.com published since 1969, the print magazine is the country's most important watchdog of american government, focusing on what's…

Social Science
3
Press Watch

To educate journalists and the public, and foster public debate, about improving political journalism to reflect public needs and hold the powerful accountable.

—
4
The Liberal Patriot Inc

The liberal patriot (tlp) is a digital newsletter focused on american politics and public policy. tlp aims to provide readers with honest analysis and original commentary to help advance a vital center perspective in american life.

Civil Rights
5
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research Inc

The manhattan institute is a community of scholars, journalists, activists, and civic leaders dedicated to advancing opportunity, individual liberty, and the rule of law in america and its great cities.

Public Benefit
6
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
7
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…

Social Science
8
World Press Institute

To promote and strengthen press freedom throughout the world.

Youth Development
9
Wisconsin Policy Forum Inc

We conduct impartial public policy research and analysis to drive informed debate and effective decision-making in the state of wisconsin.

Public Benefit
10
The Minnesota Daily

1. provide independent student journalism and comprehensive coverage of news, media and events that serve the public interest and inform the university of minnesota community.2. offer a forum for the free exchange of ideas and civil debate…

—
11
Free Press

Free press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media. we believe that positive social change, racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse…

Arts & Culture
12
Minnesota State University Student Association Inc

Led by minnesota state university students, we are the inclusive voice for all future, current, and former students. we actively work to represent and support minnesota state university students and advocate at a campus, state, and federal…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Judicial Watch Inc; the most unlike its peers is Alpha Kappa Psi Scholarship 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

13 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 14 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TURNING POINT USA INC: $664,000 · OtherTURNING POINT USA INCDAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTER: $514,000 · OtherDAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTERALPHA NEWS: $420,000 · OtherALPHA NEWSTHE BLEXIT FOUNDATION INC: $209,000 · OtherTHE BLEXIT FOUNDATION INCSchaerr Jaffe: $99,900 · OtherPRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $564,000 · EducationPRAGER UNIVERSITY…ALPHA KAPPA PSI SCHOLARSHIP FUND: $50,000 · EducationALPHA KAPPA PSI S…UPPER MIDWEST LAW CENTER: $610,000 · Crime & LegalUPPER MIDWEST LAW…MINNESOTA VOTERS ALLIANCE: $325,000 · Public BenefitMINNESOTA VOTERS …JUDICIAL WATCH INC: $259,000 · Public BenefitJUDICIAL WATCH IN…+1 more: $20,000 · Public BenefitINSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE: $200,000 · Civil RightsTAKE CHARGE MINNESOTA: $67,500 · Human ServicesMINNESOTA PARENTS ALLIANCE: $10,000 · Community Improvement
Other$1,906,900Education$614,000Crime & Legal$610,000Public Benefit$604,000Civil Rights$200,000Human Services$67,500Community Improvement$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 budgetTURNING POINT USA INC: $664,000 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetUPPER MIDWEST LAW CENTER: $610,000 over 6y, 31% of budgetPRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $564,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetDAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTER: $514,000 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetALPHA NEWS: $420,000 over 5y, 28% of budgetMINNESOTA VOTERS ALLIANCE: $325,000 over 5y, 32% of budgetJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $259,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BLEXIT FOUNDATION INC: $209,000 over 3y, 3.8% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE: $200,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetTAKE CHARGE MINNESOTA: $67,500 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetBADGER INSTITUTE INC: $20,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetMINNESOTA PARENTS ALLIANCE: $10,000 over 1y, 5.7% 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.

Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA7.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 of the American Experiment funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Center of the American Experiment. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%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
    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 · 0–5%
    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.

    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 14 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 of the American Experiment’s 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