Skip to content
Commonwealth Communications at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Commonwealth Communications

Organized and operated exclusively to promote social welfare specifically for the purposes of promoting legislative and public action in support of non-partisan progressive values in the commonwealth of pennsylvania.

$513k
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% 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$965kCivil Rights$795kHealth$175kCommunity Improvement$55kEnvironment$50kHuman Services$50kEmployment$15k
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k9 grants · $210k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+1 grant · $250k
$25,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$581k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PEOPLE POWER PENNSYLVANIA$250,000
PROJECT 26 PENNSYLVANIA$50,000
PROMOTE THE VOTE PA$25,000
API PA VOTES$25,000
WORKING FAMILIES PARTY PAC$25,000
WORKING FAMILIES POWER$25,000
CASA IN ACTION PAC$25,000
ORGANIZE PENNSYLVANIA$25,000
PENNSYLVANIA UNITED$25,000
NEW PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT$20,000
ACTION TOGETHER NEPA$15,000
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 (FY20–22, $90k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%CASA IN ACTION INC: $50k → 11%CASA IN ACTION INC: $40k → 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.

46%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$970k · 11 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +71% since the first grant, against +8% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
11

Total granted

$970k
$785k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+71%
+8%

Still filing today

64%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $350k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’22’23’24
Civil 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

  • OP
    ORGANIZE PENNSYLVANIA
    4× · 2020–2024 · $180k · revenue +41%
  • CI
    CASA IN ACTION INC
    2× · 2020–2022 · $90k · revenue +88%
  • PU
    Pennsylvania United
    2× · 2022–2024 · $75k · revenue +62%

Funded once

  • PU
    PRIORITIES USA ACTION
    one grant, 2022 · $250k
  • PK
    Project Keystone
    one grant, 2022 · $150k · revenue +5%
  • FO
    FOR OUR FUTURE
    one grant, 2022 · $75k
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
Lead Pa

Cultivating the next generation of progressive leaders across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

—
2
Keystone Democracy

Keystone Democracy's goal is to ensure that all Pennsylvania elections are implemented in a safe, secure, convenient and fair manner. We work to advance pro-democracy policies by informing elected officials, civic leaders, the media, and…

—
3
Ballot Pa Action

Informed and educated the public and lawmakers about the benefits of including independent voters in Pennsylvania's primary elections.

Civil Rights
4
Pa Alliance Action

The PA Alliance Action seeks to advocate at the state level for democracy reform through grassroots activities and support of like-minded organizations on behalf of and in support of all Pennsylvanians, in particular historically…

Civil Rights
5
Pa Alliance Foundation

Pa alliance foundation ("paaf") is a 501(c)(3) public charity that is focused on civic engagement and democracy advancement across pennsylvania, working to expand access to the ballot through non-partisan voter education and mobilization.…

Civil Rights
6
Pennsylvania First

To invest in the activation, long-term engagement, and mobilization of

—
7
Pennsylvanians for Fair Courts

To develop and advocate for legislation, regulations, and government programs to protect against judicial gerrymandering and other legislative barriers to fair courts, and to conduct research about and publicize the positions of elected…

—
8
Pittsburgh United

Pittsburgh United, Inc. strives to advance social & economic justice in the

Community Improvement
9
Pennsylvania Progress

Provide nonpartisan vote by mail education in pennslyvania.

—
10
Philly Black Worker Project

) to lead and engage in campaigns that empower Black workers to advance our rights and improve job quality in key employment sectors

Civil Rights
11
Planned Parenthood Association of Pa

Provide public education in support of planned parenthood health services, including family planning and abortion care.

—
12
Lead Pa Institute

Leadership training and comprehensive professional development programs for community activists, advocates, and prospective leaders of nonprofits and other issue advocacy organizations across the

Employment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Promote the Vote Pa; the most unlike its peers is Unite Here Action 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

16 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. 16 of the 26 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
13/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PRIORITIES USA ACTION: $250,000 · OtherPRIORITIES USA ACTIONPEOPLE POWER PENNSYLVANIA: $250,000 · OtherPEOPLE POWER PENNSYLVANIAPLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTES: $175,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD VOTESAPI PA VOTES: $105,000 · OtherAPI PA VOTESWe The People Pennsylvania Action: $100,000 · OtherWe The People Pennsylvania ActionFOR OUR FUTURE: $75,000 · OtherFOR OUR FUTURETECH FOR CAMPAIGNS: $70,000 · OtherPROJECT 26 PENNSYLVANIA: $50,000 · OtherConservation Voters of Pennsylvania: $50,000 · OtherPENNSYLVANIA SPOTLIGHT: $50,000 · Other+7 more: $210,000 · Other+7 moreORGANIZE PENNSYLVANIA: $180,000 · Civil RightsORGANIZE PENNSYLVANIAProject Keystone: $150,000 · Civil RightsProject KeystonePennsylvania United: $75,000 · Civil RightsPennsylvania UnitedNew Pennsylvania Project: $70,000 · Civil RightsNew Pennsylvania ProjectWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $50,000 · Civil RightsWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION…CEASEFIRE PENNSYLVANIA: $25,000 · Civil RightsCASA IN ACTION INC: $90,000 · Human ServicesPROMOTE THE VOTE PA: $25,000 · Human ServicesPENNSYLVANIA STANDS UP INC: $55,000 · Community Improvement
Other$1,385,000Civil Rights$550,000Human Services$115,000Community Improvement$55,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetORGANIZE PENNSYLVANIA: $180,000 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetProject Keystone: $150,000 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetWe The People Pennsylvania Action: $100,000 over 2y, 24% of budgetCASA IN ACTION INC: $90,000 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetPennsylvania United: $75,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetNew Pennsylvania Project: $70,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA STANDS UP INC: $55,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetPROJECT 26 PENNSYLVANIA: $50,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetConservation Voters of Pennsylvania: $50,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA SPOTLIGHT: $50,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $50,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetThe Voter Project: $35,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetACTION TOGETHER NEPA: $30,000 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetPROMOTE THE VOTE PA: $25,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetCEASEFIRE PENNSYLVANIA: $25,000 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetUNITE HERE ACTION FUND: $15,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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.

Sixteen Thirty FundPa Alliance ActionAmerica VotesTides AdvocacyPro-Democracy CampaignWorking Families Orga…All Hands on Deck Net…Tides FoundationPA Alliance FoundationOur American Future A…Way to Win Action Fun…Clean and Prosperous …
Sixteen Thirty FundDC37.4× affinity16 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Pa Alliance Action · America Votes · Tides Advocacy · Pro-Democracy Campaign · Working Families Organization Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Tides Foundation · PA Alliance Foundation · Our American Future Action · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Clean and Prosperous America

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 Commonwealth Communications funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Commonwealth Communications. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%6%14%25%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
    1get 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Commonwealth Communications?

    Find your warmest path to Commonwealth Communications 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 26 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.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Commonwealth Communications’ 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