Skip to content
Civic Involvement Fund at a glance

· Public charity

Civic Involvement Fund

$24M
Granted FY2023
14
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$5.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01FY2023 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $150k
  • $250k+13 grants · $24M
$1,500,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$25k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION$5,000,000
FAIR DEMOCRACY (FORWARD MAJORITY)$4,000,000
FUTURE NOW ACTION$3,850,000
CENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION$2,000,000
FAMILY FRIENDLY ACTION FUND$1,500,000
BLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITION$1,500,000
AMERICA VOTES$1,500,000
SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND$1,000,000
EMERGING AMERICAN MAJORITIES$1,000,000
EVERY ELIGIBLE AMERICAN$1,000,000
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC$975,000
AMERICA WORKS USA$500,000
MAJORITY FORWARD$500,000
MICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND$150,000
02The need
02

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 (FY23–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%FUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION: $5.0M → 14%MICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND: $150k → 8%FAMILY FRIENDLY ACTION FUND: $1.5M → 7%FAIR DEMOCRACY (FORWARD MAJORITY): $4.0M → 14%FUTURE NOW ACTION: $3.9M → 14%EVERY ELIGIBLE AMERICAN: $1.0M → 14%BLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITION: $1.5M → 14%EMERGING AMERICAN MAJORITIES: $1.0M → 14%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $975k → 14%MAJORITY FORWARD: $500k → 14%AMERICA WORKS USA: $500k → 14%CENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION: $2.0M → 14%AMERICA VOTES: $1.5M → 14%SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $1.0M → 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 Works Inc

The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.

Civil Rights
2
One for Democracy Action Fund

One for democracy unlocks resources to build a healthy democracy by fostering meaningful relationships between philanthropists and the democracy leaders of our time.

—
3
Democracy Forward

See schedule o.this organization seeks to build collective power to defend and advance a vibrant democracy that benefits all people.

—
4
All Americans Vote

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

Civil Rights
5
Defend the Vote Action Fund

To sustain and support the prioritization of comprehensive voting rights and democracy reform legislation at all levels of government.

—
6
Voteamerica

The mission of voteamerica is to strengthen united states democracy by increasing voter turnout.

Civil Rights
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
Fair Fight Action Inc

Fair fight action promotes fair elections in georgia and around the country, encourages voter participation in elections, educates voters about elections and their voting rights, and advocates for progressive issues.

Education
9
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
10
Send the Vote Inc

Conduct digital, direct mail and other public communication campaigns to support voter registration and get-out-the-vote efforts.

—
11
Run for Something Action Fund

The organization's mission is to recruit, support and mobilize diverse young people to get involved in the civic life of their communities on a nonpartisan basis, especially state and local government. the organization is committed to…

Public Benefit
12
Advance American Democracy Inc

To protect democracy by advocating for policies to strenghten democracy, educating the public about threats to our democracy, and highlighting the unpopularity of federal policies that places money and power over the rights and freedom of…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is State Democracy Action Fund; the most unlike its peers is America Votes. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

14 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
8/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION: $5,000,000 · Public BenefitFUTURE FORWARD USA ACTIONFUTURE NOW ACTION: $3,850,000 · Public BenefitFUTURE NOW ACTIONSTATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND: $1,000,000 · Public BenefitSTATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUNDFAIR DEMOCRACY: $4,000,000 · Civil RightsFAIR DEMOCRACYCENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION: $2,000,000 · Civil RightsCENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATIONFORWARD ACTION FUND: $1,500,000 · Civil RightsFORWARD ACTION FUNDEVERY ELIGIBLE AMERICAN: $1,000,000 · Civil RightsEVERY ELIGIBLE AMERICANLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $975,000 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC+1 more: $150,000 · Civil RightsBLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITION: $1,500,000 · OtherBLACK PROGR…AMERICA WORKS USA: $500,000 · OtherAMERICA WOR…MAJORITY FORWARD: $500,000 · OtherMAJORITY FO…America Votes: $1,500,000 · Community ImprovementSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $1,000,000 · Environment
Public Benefit$9,850,000Civil Rights$9,625,000Other$2,500,000Community Improvement$1,500,000Environment$1,000,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION: $5,000,000 over 1y, 8.2% of budgetFAIR DEMOCRACY: $4,000,000 over 1y, 31% of budgetFUTURE NOW ACTION: $3,850,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetCENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION: $2,000,000 over 1y, 86% of budgetFORWARD ACTION FUND: $1,500,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetBLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITION: $1,500,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetAmerica Votes: $1,500,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $1,000,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSTATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND: $1,000,000 over 1y, 35% of budgetEVERY ELIGIBLE AMERICAN: $1,000,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $975,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetAMERICA WORKS USA: $500,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetMAJORITY FORWARD: $500,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND: $150,000 over 1y, 5.6% 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.

America VotesSixteen Thirty FundHopewell FundFuture Now ActionBright Future FundFuture Forward USA Ac…North FundWay to Win Action Fun…Open Society Action F…Impetus FundOakw FundWellness Advocacy Fund
America VotesDC24× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: America Votes · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Hopewell Fund · Future Now Action · Bright Future Fund · Future Forward USA Action · North Fund · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Impetus Fund · Oakw Fund · Wellness Advocacy 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 Civic Involvement Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Civic Involvement Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%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 Civic Involvement Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Civic Involvement Fund 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 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Civic Involvement’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