Loading…
· Public charity
CITIZENS FOR SELF-GOVERNANCE
To provide communication, education, and training on matters related to self-governance.
$203k
Granted FY2024
1
Grants
1
Communities
$200k
Largest
01What you fund
0179% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2020–2024.
Philanthropy$515kEducation$236kArts & Culture$119kPublic Benefit$50kCommunity Improvement$40kCrime & Legal$40kOther$260k
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
2020
—
2021
governmentfoundation'spolicy
2022
newslibertypolicy
2023
—
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2024 · 1 grant
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
$200,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
- CONVENTION OF STATES ACTION$200,000
02The need
04
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:
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10% — the area typically sits at 11%. 22% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
15%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$189k · 3 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +137% since the first grant, against +38% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
3
7
Total granted
$189k
$871k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+137%
+38%
Still filing today
100%
86%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
EducationCrime & LegalPhilanthropyArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitOther
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
- MRMEDIA RESEARCH CENTER2× · 2022–2023 · $119k · revenue +7%
- TPTEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION3× · 2021–2023 · $50k · revenue +137%
- AFAMERICAN FIRST LEGAL FOUNDATION2× · 2021–2022 · $20k · revenue +401%
Funded once
- VCVANGUARD CHARITABLE TRUSTone grant, 2020 · $515k · revenue -7%
- 1A1789 ALLIANCEone grant, 2020 · $216k · revenue -23% · 100% of their budget
- EWEMPOWER WISCONSIN FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue -99% · 76% of their budget
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.
1
Lawfare Institute
Produce scientific content on lawfare and the analysis of emblematic cases of the phenomenon through publication of the lawfare website, podcasts and related media.
Public Benefit
2
Media Freedom Foundation
Public education on contemporary social issues and protection of the 1st amendment of the U.S. constitution
Recreation & Sports
3
Guardianorg Foundation
Guardian.org foundation is organized and operated to educate, advance, and inform public discourse and citizen participation around the most pressing issues of our time through the support and advancement of independent journalism.
Arts & Culture
4
American Civil Liberties Union
American civil liberties union of wisconsin foundation, inc. protects and promotes the civil liberties and civil rights of all wisconsin residents by means of litigation, advocacy, public education, research, and organizing.
Civil Rights
5
Us - China Policy Foundation
—
6
The Libertarian Institute
Provide information regarding libertarian principles.
Education
7
National Popular Vote
To educate the public regarding its proposal to implement a Nationwide Popular Vote Election of the President of the United States
Public Benefit
8
Aclu Foundation of Texas Inc
To be Texas' foremost champion of individual rights & freedoms through education & litigation.
Civil Rights
9
America's Newspapers Foundation
To support and promote initiatives for local newspapers. the initiatives should provide needed training, assets and best practices to newspaper owners, managers and staffs, helping to ensure that newspapers remain a vital part of their…
Education
10
Center for Law and Policy
The Center for Law and Policy (CLP) is a public policy organization dedicated to promoting and defending liberty, equality before the law, and the sovereignty of the states. To this end, CLP promotes open discussion with state attorneys…
Arts & Culture
11
Contemporary Policy Institute
Philanthropy
12
Libertas Institute
Libertas Institute is a public policy and education organization focused on free markets and individual rights. We generate non-partisan analysis and commentary, conduct investigative research, and publish educational literature to inform…
Public Benefit
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Texas Public Policy Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network
10 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Philanthropy$515,000Other$260,000Education$236,300Arts & Culture$118,659Public Benefit$50,000Community Improvement$40,000Crime & Legal$40,000
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 VANGUARD CHARITABLE TRUST ↗
- Who funds 1789 ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds CONVENTION OF STATES ACTION ↗
- Who funds MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER ↗
- Who funds EMPOWER WISCONSIN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds EMPOWER TEXANS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LANDMARK LEGAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FIRST LEGAL FOUNDATION ↗
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA9.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 CITIZENS FOR SELF-GOVERNANCE 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 · 0–5%
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: 1789 ALLIANCE.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
low risk
~11 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 7 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 815232031 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 1789 ALLIANCE, 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 11 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
- WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 100% 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 Citizens for Self-Governance?
Find your warmest path to Citizens for Self-Governance 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.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines