· Public charity
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.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k17 grants · $565k
- $50k–250k73 grants · $8.1M
- $250k+3 grants · $810k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CASA IN ACTION | $285,000 |
| GEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS INC | $275,000 |
| FLORIDA RISING INC | $250,000 |
| LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC | $245,000 |
| LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA | $245,000 |
| MAKE THE ROAD ACTION | $225,000 |
| OUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA | $220,000 |
| PROGRESSIVE MARYLAND INC | $200,000 |
| MICHIGAN PEOPLES CAMPAIGN | $200,000 |
| WE THE PEOPLE ACTION FUND | $200,000 |
| CASA IN ACTION | $195,000 |
| NEW VIRGINIA MAJORITY | $195,000 |
| DOWN HOME NORTH CAROLINA C4 | $190,000 |
| COALFIELD JUSTICE ACTION | $185,000 |
| BLACK VOTERS MATTER FUND INC | $165,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY24–24, $1.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 11% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
The Organization was established to coordinate and promote progressive issues, policies, initiatives, and referenda, and to pursue electoral reform that expands access to the ballot.
To promote civic participation.
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…
Six action realizes a bold policy agenda that secures and sustains meaningful racial, gender, social and economic justice outcomes that center the people most impacted by systemic and structural oppression. we support values-aligned state…
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.
To develop and advocate for legislation, regulations, ballot initiatives, and government programs as a voice of the working class, to promote social justice, and to stimulate the economy; and, to conduct research, educate the public, and…
Minnesota Voice is a collaboration of organizations working toward permanent change in social, racial, and economic justice by increasing civic engagement and voter participation across the state.
Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay
To ensure that working class people are educated on their voting rights. The coalition engages in mobilization and educational information sessions to ensure that all workers voices are heard.
Az wins is a coalition of organizations dedicated to achieving public policies that benefit working arizona families and advancing an inclusive, engaged, just and equitable state for all arizonans. in 2024 az wins substantially reduced its…
Action institute nc is a community organization and citizens action group that organizes residents of low-wealth communities and constituencies most of whom are people of color- to represent their own interests on issues of social and…
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.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Somos Accion and the most unlike its peers is Instituto Power. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 7 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 26% of your grantees by number, and just 17% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
58 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 58 of the 61 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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 CASA IN ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA RISING INC ↗
- Who funds MAKE THE ROAD ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds NEW VIRGINIA MAJORITY ↗
- Who funds DOWN HOME NC ↗
- Who funds Michigan Peoples Campaign ↗
- Who funds We The People Action Fund ↗
- Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC ↗
- Who funds LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds FAITH IN MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds TAKEACTION MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds POWER ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds OUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds Black Voters Matter Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds COALFIELD JUSTICE ACTION ↗
- Who funds Pennsylvania United ↗
- Who funds PROGRESSIVE MARYLAND INC ↗
- Who funds ADVANCE NORTH CAROLINA INC ↗
- Who funds PENNSYLVANIA STANDS UP INC ↗
- Who funds MN350 ACTION ↗
- Who funds VOCES UNIDAS ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds UNIDOS MN ↗
- Who funds COPAL COMMUNIDADES ORGANIZANDO EL PODER Y LA A ↗
- Who funds PROGRESS NOW INC ↗
- Who funds Progress Georgia Inc ↗
- Who funds RURAL ARIZONA ACTION ↗
- Who funds ORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT ↗
- Who funds ORGANIZE PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds Instituto Power ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION ↗
- Who funds LAND STEWARDSHIP ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds FAITH IN COLORADO ↗
- Who funds Jobs with Justice ↗
- Who funds SEMILLA ACTION ↗
- Who funds 9TO5 ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds ALLIED MEDIA ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds NM NATIVE VOTE ↗
- Who funds NORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND ↗
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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · America Votes · Tides Advocacy · Women Donors Network Action · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Pro-Democracy Campaign · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Working Families Organization Inc · Tides Foundation · Center for Community Change Action
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 organization Climate Equity Action Fund 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.
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 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Climate Equity Action Fund?
Find your warmest path to Climate Equity Action 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.