Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Democracyfirst

DEMOCRACYFIRST is a 501(c)4 dedicated to restoring public trust in the electoral system, protecting free and fair elections, and renewing the pro-democracy consensus in american politics.

$1.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$1.0M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2025.

Public Benefit$11MCivil Rights$640kHuman Services$100kHealth$50k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $200k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.4M
$100,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DEMOCRACYFIRST PAC$1,000,000
COMMON SENSE NEW YORK$400,000
WOMEN4US$100,000
DEFEND THE VOTE ACTION FUND$100,000
DEFENDING MAIN STREET SUPERPAC$25,000
02The need
03

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:

Your human-services grants (FY23–23, $1.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 90% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK: $450k → 14%NORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND INC: $150k → 8%ACTIVATE 48 INC: $750k → 11%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $100k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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

MT
MN
WI
MI
NY
MA
NV
OH
PA
CA
MD
AZ
NC
DC
TX
FL

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.

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.

36%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$4.2M · 7 repeat orgs$7.6M to everyone else

7 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
37

Total granted

$4.2M
$7.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+59%
+62%

Still filing today

71%
89%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $225k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitHealthArts & CultureOther

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

  • AV
    America Votes
    2× · 2022–2023 · $640k · revenue +189%
  • FI
    FAITH IN MINNESOTA
    2× · 2022–2023 · $600k · revenue +68% · 25% of their budget
  • OV
    OUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA
    2× · 2022–2023 · $425k · revenue +59%

Funded once

  • PN
    PROGRESS NOW INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $750k · revenue +355% · 28% of their budget
  • A4
    ACTIVATE 48 EDUCATION FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $750k · revenue -44% · 35% of their budget
  • PT
    PROMOTE THE VOTE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $650k · revenue +90%

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
Progress Arizona

Progress arizona is an arizona nonprofit corporation located in phoenix, arizona. progress arizona is an organization founded in 2018 to educate the public about key policy issues using digital organizing and communications.

Civil Rights
2
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
3
Democracy Works Inc

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

Civil Rights
4
The Act Now Project

To build innovative solutions to increase civic engagement, including through voter engagement and voter education initiativesamong voters abroad.

Civil Rights
5
Lead Pa

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

—
6
Right to Democracy Project

Advance democracy, equity, and self-determination in U.S. territories through participatory advocacy, narrative and cultural change, and ecosystem building.

Civil Rights
7
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
8
Fair Democracy

Fair democracy works to ensure that the roots of american democracy are healthy with strong voting rights and access, an engaged and informed electorate, an open and accountable government and trusted messengers engaging americans in civil…

Civil Rights
9
More Than a Vote

Educate, energize, and protect voters as they headed to the ballot box. but, as our name makes clear, we were always about more than voting.

Civil Rights
10
All Americans Vote

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

Civil Rights
11
People's Independent Commission

Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay

—
12
Bold Impact

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

Arts & Culture

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Organizing Empowerment Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is North Carolina a Philip Randolph Educational Fund. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyImmigrant Worker SupportPregnancy Support ServicesEnvironmental Conservation …School District FoundationsWomen & Girls Leadership De…Policy Research and Advocacy
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 8 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%29%<5yr14%36%5–10yr19%21%10–20yr16%7%20–35yr13%7%35–55yr16%0%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%33%<5yr14%30%5–10yr19%25%10–20yr16%7%20–35yr13%7%35–55yr16%0%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 29% of your grantees by number, and just 33% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
4%
2/47
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,518

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.

04the grantee network

39 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. 39 of the 47 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
14
Early backer (in before they grew)
39/39
Grantees still filing
28/39
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

PROGRESS NOW INC — $750,000 · Civil RightsPROGRESS NOW INCPROMOTE THE VOTE INC — $650,000 · Civil RightsPROMOTE THE VOTE INCFAITH IN MINNESOTA — $600,000 · Civil RightsFAITH IN MINNESOTAOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA — $425,000 · Civil RightsOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONAVOCES DE LA FRONTERA ACTION INC — $350,000 · Civil RightsVOCES DE LA FRONTERA ACTION INCFLORIDA RISING INC — $300,000 · Civil RightsFLORIDA RISING INCMICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND — $275,000 · Civil RightsMICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUNDPA ALLIANCE ACTION — $250,000 · Civil RightsTHE OHIO ORGANIZING CAMPAIGN — $200,000 · Civil RightsPRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN — $200,000 · Civil RightsPennsylvania United — $200,000 · Civil Rights+8 more — $635,000 · Civil Rights+8 moreDEMOCRACYFIRST — $1,150,000 · OtherDEMOCRACYFIRSTCOMMON SENSE NEW YORK — $900,000 · OtherCOMMON SENSE NEW YORKOhio Progressive Collaborative — $400,000 · OtherOhio Progressive CollaborativeTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK — $200,000 · OtherASIAN PACIFIC ISLANDER POLITICAL AL LIANCE — $150,000 · OtherTIDES ADVOCACY — $150,000 · Other+12 more — $880,000 · Other+12 moreACTIVATE 48 EDUCATION FUND — $750,000 · Human ServicesACTIVATE 48 E…CITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK INC — $450,000 · Human ServicesCITIZEN ACTIO…NORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND — $150,000 · Human ServicesNORTH CAROLIN…LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA — $100,000 · Human ServicesLIVING UNITED…America Votes — $640,000 · Community ImprovementA BETTER BIG SKY — $250,000 · Community ImprovementFUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION — $500,000 · Public BenefitPROGRESS NORTH CAROLINA ACTION — $100,000 · Public BenefitAMERICAN INDEPENDENT MEDIA — $125,000 · Arts & CulturePLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTH FLORIDA AND THE TREASURE COAST INC — $50,000 · Health
Civil Rights$4,835,000Other$3,830,000Human Services$1,450,000Community Improvement$890,000Public Benefit$600,000Arts & Culture$125,000Health$50,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetPROGRESS NOW INC — $750,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetACTIVATE 48 EDUCATION FUND — $750,000 over 1y, 35% of budgetAmerica Votes — $640,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetFAITH IN MINNESOTA — $600,000 over 2y, 25% of budgetFUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION — $500,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK INC — $450,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA — $425,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetOhio Progressive Collaborative — $400,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetVOCES DE LA FRONTERA ACTION INC — $350,000 over 2y, 9.8% of budgetFLORIDA RISING INC — $300,000 over 1y, 10.0% of budgetMICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND — $275,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetA BETTER BIG SKY — $250,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetPA ALLIANCE ACTION — $250,000 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetTHE OHIO ORGANIZING CAMPAIGN — $200,000 over 1y, 9.2% of budgetPRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN — $200,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetPennsylvania United — $200,000 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK — $200,000 over 1y, 7.8% of budgetNew Pennsylvania Project — $150,000 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND — $150,000 over 1y, 23% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY — $150,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN INDEPENDENT MEDIA — $125,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetPROGRESS NORTH CAROLINA ACTION — $100,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetACTION TOGETHER NEPA — $100,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetUN-PAC ACTION — $100,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetCare in Action Inc — $100,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetLEADERS IGNITING TRANSFORMATION ACTION FUND INC — $100,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetNew Rural Project — $100,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetDEFEND THE VOTE ACTION FUND — $100,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetWISDOM ACTION NETWORK INC — $100,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA — $100,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetARIZONA WINS — $100,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetFOR OUR FUTURE ACTION FUND — $60,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetNEXTGEN CLIMATE ACTION — $60,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTH FLORIDA AND THE TREASURE COAST INC — $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCENTER FOR EMPOWERED POLITICS — $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetPODER NC ACTION — $50,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetINDEPENDENT ARIZONA — $45,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND INC — $40,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budget
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.

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.

Sixteen Thirty FundAmerica VotesTides AdvocacyOpen Society Action F…All Hands on Deck Net…Way to Win Action Fun…Pro-Democracy CampaignTides FoundationNorth FundWomen Donors Network …Center for Community …NEO Philanthropy Acti…
Sixteen Thirty FundDC61.8× affinity29 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · America Votes · Tides Advocacy · Open Society Action Fund Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Pro-Democracy Campaign · Tides Foundation · North Fund · Women Donors Network Action · Center for Community Change Action · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc

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 Democracyfirst 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 · 30%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 6%
  • Planned Parenthood of South Florida and the Treasure Coast Inc — 6% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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: 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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Democracyfirst?

Find your warmest path to Democracyfirst 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 47 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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