Skip to content
Clean and Prosperous America at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Clean and Prosperous America

To accelerate the transition to a net zero carbon economy with prosperity for all

$16M
Granted FY2024still arriving
202
Grants FY2024still arriving
30
States reached
$2.2M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% 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$6.7MEnvironment$5.5MCivil Rights$3.3MCommunity Improvement$1.0MPublic Safety & Disaster$870kHealth$429kHuman Services$413kEducation$339kOther$0
02FY2024 · 202 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 202 grants below total $15,014,720, the rows itemized in this filing. The $15,963,891 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $949,171 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k27 grants · $180k
  • $10k–50k112 grants · $2.3M
  • $50k–250k52 grants · $4.2M
  • $250k+11 grants · $8.3M
$25,000
Median grant
30
States reached
$812k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CAPA PAC$2,235,000
Focus for Democracy Fund$1,100,931
Nebraska Railroaders for Public Safety$870,100
Organizing Empowerment Fund$835,000
Retire Career Politicians$785,000
Sixteen Thirty Fund (Rural Victory Fund)$500,000
Sixteen Thirty Fund (Rural Victory Fund)$500,000
America Votes Education Fund$469,228
Retire Career Politicians$402,400
Global Impact Social Welfare Fund$400,000
Planned Parenthood Votes$250,000
Dunn's Democracy Defenders$200,000
Retire Career Politicians$200,000
Independent Veterans of America PAC$199,000
Ohio Organizing Collaborative$186,000
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 (FY20–24, $560k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 84% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE ARIZONA: $109k → 11%Student Organizing Inc: $15k → 16%JAKARA MOVEMENT: $20k → 19%MinKwon Center for Community Action: $6k → 13%Hispanic Center of Western Michigan: $50k → 11%PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL ALLIANCE: $15k → 15%Harambee House Inc: $50k → 16%GATEWAY COMMUNITY SERVICE MAINE: $5k → 7%NYIC Action (NYS Immigrant Action Fund): $25k → 8%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE ARIZONA: $8k → 11%LIFTT: $10k → 9%NORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND: $25k → 8%WorkMoney Foundation: $90k → 17%HEARTLAND WORKERS CENTER: $63k → 12%El Pueblo: $26k → 8%Heartland Workers Center: $24k → 12%Evergreen Action: $20k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
ME
WA
ID
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
IA
OH
PA
NJ
CT
CA
CO
NE
KY
VA
MD
DE
AZ
KS
NC
DC
LA
GA
TX
FL
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.

15%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.6M · 34 repeat orgs$15M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +51% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

34 repeat relationships: 25 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 154 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

34
76

Total granted

$2.6M
$2.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+13%

Still filing today

88%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 6% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13M went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsEnvironmentPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • GE
    GOODPOWER EDUCATION FUND INC
    2× · 2020–2024 · $164k · revenue +256%
  • TO
    THE OHIO ORGANIZING CAMPAIGN
    2× · 2022–2023 · $150k · revenue +168%
  • SG
    SOUTHWEST GA PROJECT FOR COMMUNITY EDUCATION INC
    2× · 2020–2022 · $149k · revenue +103%

Funded once

  • LI
    LEADERS IGNITING TRANSFORMATION ACTION FUND INC
    one grant, 2022 · $218k · revenue -2%
  • GN
    Greater New Orleans Housing Alliance
    one grant, 2023 · $131k · revenue -49%
  • EV
    EMERGING VOTERS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $80k · 27% of their budget
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
Electoral Collective

Electoral Collective coordinates a broad-based coalition of existing entities active in the climate justice and community organizing space to raise public awareness and educational opportunities.

Civil Rights
2
Electoral Collective Action

Electoral Collective Action coordinates a broad-based coalition of existing entities active in the climate justice and community organizing space to raise public awareness and educational opportunities.

Civil Rights
3
Nextgen Climate Action

Nextgen america empowers young people to engage in the democratic process through voter registration and civic engagement on issues of public policy. this is achieved through innovative digital outreach, communications, and grassroots…

Unclassified
4
Climate Equity Action Fund

The climate equity action fund (ceaf) works hand-in-hand with community-based partners in critical states across the country to secure and sustain policy wins for climate and clean energy. building on over a decade of trust with leading…

Environment
5
California Environmental Voters

To increase public awareness of elected officials' performances on environmental issues, to influence decisions of public officials on environmental legislation and policy, and to engage in related social welfare activities to promote and…

Civil Rights
6
Powerswitch Action

Powerswitch action is a national network forging collective democracy and economies in our cities and states, together with our 21 grassroots affiliates.

Community Improvement
7
Alabama Values

A nonpartisan grassroots communication organization that works to raise awareness and increase engagement around community issues in alabama by working directly with civic organizations advocating civic participation in communities across…

Arts & Culture
8
Bold Impact

Bold Impact is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting a democracy where all communities get to thrive.

Arts & Culture
9
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.

—
10
Wepower

We activate community power to redesign social systems to be just and equitable for all through (1) developing and supporting leaders and organizations and (2) leading campaigns, coalitions, and innovative initiatives.

Community Improvement
11
League of Women Voters of New Jersey

Through grassroots people-powered advocacy and organizing, lwvnj trains, mobilizes, and educates advocates to have a greater voice in government and influence public policy.

—
12
Power Coalition for Electoral Justice

We created the power coalition for electoral justice with our partners because this is a moment of opportunity; a time to dig in and become internationally strategic; in short, to use this movement to create a true paradigm shift. to plant…

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Organizing Empowerment Fund Inc; the most unlike its peers is Sowega Rising. 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

222 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. 222 of the 268 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)
42
Early backer (in before they grew)
219/222
Grantees still filing
80/222
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RETIRE CAREER POLITICIANS: $1,387,400 · OtherRETIRE CAREER POLITICIANSNebraska Railroaders for Public Safety: $870,100 · OtherNebraska Railroaders for Public SafetyPLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTES: $250,000 · OtherDunn's Democracy Defenders: $250,000 · OtherLEADERS IGNITING TRANSFORMATION ACTION FUND INC: $218,250 · Other+77 more: $3,466,332 · Other+77 moreCLEAN AND PROSPEROUS AMERICA: $2,235,000 · EnvironmentCLEAN AND PROSPEROUS AMERICASIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $1,800,000 · EnvironmentSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND+21 more: $1,061,180 · Environment+21 moreFOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND: $1,100,931 · Civil RightsFOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUNDORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND INC: $935,000 · Civil RightsORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT F…America Votes Education Fund: $469,228 · Civil RightsAmerica Votes Education …THE OHIO ORGANIZING CAMPAIGN: $150,000 · Civil Rights+37 more: $1,522,230 · Civil Rights+37 moreGlobal Impact Social Welfare Fund: $400,000 · Public BenefitGlobal Impa…GRASSROOTS ORGANIZING WESTERN WISCONSIN: $199,765 · Public BenefitGRASSROOTS …THE OHIO ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE: $186,000 · Public BenefitTHE OHIO OR…Center for Common Ground: $179,317 · Public BenefitCenter for …GREATER CLEVELAND CONGREGATIONS INC: $160,000 · Public BenefitGREATER CLE…CENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ACTION: $136,500 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR …SOUTHERN VISION ALLIANCE: $135,060 · Public BenefitSOUTHERN VI…Greater New Orleans Housing Alliance: $131,200 · Public BenefitGreater New…+13 more: $359,200 · Public Benefit+13 moreLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $116,100 · Human ServicesWORKMONEY FOUNDATION INC: $90,000 · Human ServicesHEARTLAND WORKERS CENTER: $86,800 · Human ServicesHarambee House Inc: $50,000 · Human ServicesHISPANIC CENTER OF WESTERN MICHIGAN INC: $50,000 · Human ServicesEL PUEBLO INC: $26,000 · Human ServicesNEW YORK STATE IMMIGRANT ACTION FUND INCORPORATED: $25,000 · Human ServicesNORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND: $25,000 · Human ServicesEVERGREEN ACTION: $20,000 · Human ServicesJAKARA MOVEMENT: $20,000 · Human Services+2 more: $30,000 · Human ServicesVIRGINIA NEW MAJORITY EDUCATION FUND: $85,000 · EducationRISE ACTION FUND: $82,500 · EducationSAVE OUR SCHOOLS ARIZONA NETWORK: $68,200 · EducationSOUTH GEORGIA VOTERS LEAGUE INC: $63,000 · EducationForward Together Wisconsin: $60,000 · Education1 VOTE COUNTS: $59,719 · EducationNEW NORTH CAROLINA PROJECT: $36,400 · EducationBLUEPRINT NORTH CAROLINA: $26,000 · Education+1 more: $16,000 · EducationWASHINGTON BUSINESS ALLIANCE FUND: $75,000 · Community ImprovementSowega Rising: $61,000 · Community ImprovementNORTH MAIN STREET FUND: $50,000 · Community ImprovementAmerica Votes: $50,000 · Community ImprovementWe Vote We Win: $45,000 · Community ImprovementCENTRO PARA LA RECONSTRUCCION DEL HABITAT: $36,500 · Community ImprovementPENNSYLVANIA STANDS UP INSTITUTE: $31,000 · Community ImprovementASIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $26,000 · Community ImprovementVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC: $25,000 · Community ImprovementOHIO FAMILIES UNITE AGAINST POLICE BRUTALITY: $20,000 · Community ImprovementNORTHERN PLAINS RESOURCE COUNCIL: $18,000 · Community Improvement+1 more: $15,000 · Community Improvement
Other$6,442,082Environment$5,096,180Civil Rights$4,177,389Public Benefit$1,887,042Human Services$538,900Education$496,819Community Improvement$452,500

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetCLEAN AND PROSPEROUS AMERICA: $2,235,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $1,800,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetFOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND: $1,100,931 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND INC: $935,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetAmerica Votes Education Fund: $469,228 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetGlobal Impact Social Welfare Fund: $400,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetLEADERS IGNITING TRANSFORMATION ACTION FUND INC: $218,250 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetGRASSROOTS ORGANIZING WESTERN WISCONSIN: $199,765 over 1y, 24% of budgetTHE OHIO ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE: $186,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetCenter for Common Ground: $179,317 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetGOODPOWER EDUCATION FUND INC: $164,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetGREATER CLEVELAND CONGREGATIONS INC: $160,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetTHE OHIO ORGANIZING CAMPAIGN: $150,000 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetSOUTHWEST GA PROJECT FOR COMMUNITY EDUCATION INC: $149,000 over 2y, 7.7% of budgetCENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ACTION: $136,500 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetSOUTHERN VISION ALLIANCE: $135,060 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetGreater New Orleans Housing Alliance: $131,200 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $116,100 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetNETROOTS FOUNDATION: $116,000 over 2y, 22% of budgetMARCH ON: $115,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetCare in Action Inc: $111,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNITE HERE ACTION FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetMICHIGAN ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE COALITION: $100,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetCONSERVATION COLORADO EDUCATION FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetONE FAIR WAGE ACTION INC: $98,500 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetBlack Votes Matter Institute of Community Engagement: $95,180 over 2y, 7.0% of budgetMAKE THE ROAD ACTION INC: $94,500 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetWORKMONEY FOUNDATION INC: $90,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetATLANTA GROWING LEADERSHIP OF WOMEN INC: $87,000 over 3y, 25% of budgetHEARTLAND WORKERS CENTER: $86,800 over 2y, 7.7% of budgetVIRGINIA NEW MAJORITY EDUCATION FUND: $85,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetRISE ACTION FUND: $82,500 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetEMERGING VOTERS INC: $79,900 over 1y, 27% of budgetTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $79,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetWASHINGTON BUSINESS ALLIANCE FUND: $75,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetLAND STEWARDSHIP ACTION FUND: $75,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetSEMBRANDO SENTIDO INC: $74,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetCASA INC: $71,108 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE VOTER PROJECT FUND: $70,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSAVE OUR SCHOOLS ARIZONA NETWORK: $68,200 over 1y, 8.0% of budgetENVIRONMENT AMERICA RESEARCH AND POLICY CENTER INC: $67,680 over 2y, 1.8% of budget350 WISCONSIN ACTION INC: $65,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetSowega Rising: $61,000 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetCAROLINA FEDERATION: $60,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetLoud Light: $60,000 over 1y, 9.0% of budgetCONSERVATION VOTERS FOR IDAHO EDUCATION FUND INC: $60,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetForward Together Wisconsin: $60,000 over 2y, 2.6% 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.

All Hands on Deck Net…Sixteen Thirty FundTides AdvocacyAmerica VotesWindward FundTides FoundationUnited States Energy …Open Society Action F…Way to Win Action Fun…New Venture FundNorth FundAmalgamated Charitabl…
All Hands on Deck Network IncMA100.7× affinity56 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Tides Advocacy · America Votes · Windward Fund · Tides Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · New Venture Fund · North Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc

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 Clean and Prosperous America funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Clean and Prosperous America. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 100%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 100%
  • Inclusive Prosperity Capital Inc: 100% of income from government
  • Casa Inc: 8% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
10get no government money at all
19report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Clean and Prosperous America?

Find your warmest path to Clean and Prosperous America 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 268 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.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2024, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Clean and Prosperous America’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