How much did DRUG POLICY ACTION grant in FY2024?

DRUG POLICY ACTION reported 10 grants totaling $1,365,000 in its FY2024 IRS filing.

Where is DRUG POLICY ACTION based?

DRUG POLICY ACTION is based in NY.

DRUG POLICY ACTION

Foundation Dossiers Mostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →

· Public charity

DRUG POLICY ACTION

DRUG POLICY ACTION believes that the regulation of drugs should be grounded in evidence, health, equity, and human rights.

$1.4M

Granted FY2024

Grants

Communities

$860k

Largest

01What you fund

0184% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2019–2024.

Health$28MCivil Rights$263kHuman Services$181kPublic Benefit$170kPublic Safety & Disaster$35kOther$5.3M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

—

2020

—

2021

legalization cannabiscannabis adultsjusticeadults disruptingdisrupting arrestsarrests reducingreducing government

2022

cannabisballot

2023

ground gamegame fund'sfund's ballotmeasure sansan antonioballot measure

2024

implementation developdevelop sustainablesustainable advocacyeducationalmarijuana

2025

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

$10k–50k4 grants · $85k
$50k–250k5 grants · $415k
$250k+1 grant · $860k

$65,000

Median grant

States reached

$20M

Total assets

Largest grants

DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE$860,000
UNITE OREGON ACTION$145,000
MIKE SCHMIDT FOR MULTNOMAH DA$75,000
IMAGINE BLACK$65,000
THE URBAN LEAGUE OF PORTLAND$65,000
LATINO NETWORK$65,000
GROUND GAME TEXAS$40,000
SOMOS TEJAS$20,000
NEW DAY NEVADA PAC$15,000
CHAICHI FOR OREGON$10,000

02The need

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 (FY23–24, $181k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12% — the area typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — 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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$30M · 4 repeat orgs$3.8M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +36% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

4 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$30M

$3.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%

Still filing today

50%

17%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $460k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Civil RightsHuman ServicesPublic BenefitHealthPublic Safety & DisasterOther

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

DP
DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE
6× · 2019–2024 · $28M · revenue +36% · 67% of their budget
IP
INITIATIVE PETITION COMMITTEE NO 44
2× · 2020–2021 · $2.1M
R2
REGISTER 2 VOTE (GROUND GAME TEXAS)
3× · 2022–2024 · $110k · revenue -72%

Funded once

MT
MORE TREATMENT FOR A BETTER OREGON YES TO 110
one grant, 2021 · $2.4M
MP
MARIJUANA POLICY PROJECT
one grant, 2023 · $178k · revenue -12%
CT
COMMIT TO CHANGE WA
one grant, 2022 · $150k

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.

Latino Political Network

—

Yes On National Popular Vote

Support "yes" vote on referendum dealing with national popular vote

—

Greater Spokane Action

Greater Spokane Action (GSA) is the political arm of Greater Spokane Progress (GSP), reshaping politics by educating, advocating, and mobilizing to establish and strengthen equitable and progressive policies in our community.

Civil Rights

Grassroots Leadership Inc

Grassroots leadership fights to end for-profit incarceration and reduce reliance on criminalization and detention through direct action, organizing, research, and public education. grassroots leadership builds bridges between communities…

—

Northwest Progressive Institute

The Northwest Progressive Institute is a social welfare organization working to raise everyone's equality of life through insightful research and imaginative advocacy. NPI's projects and publications promote policy development based on…

Civil Rights

Upstate Action Alliance

Non-PartisanVoter Educ Advocacy

Civil Rights

Nevada Alliance

The Nevada Alliance is a state-based donor collaborative committed to building sustainable Democratic gains. We connect smart investment opportunities to passionate and committed investors for Nevada-specific gains on the issues that…

—

Protect Colorados Vote

To oppose a colorado statewide ballot initiative to join the national popular vote compact

—

Latino Network Action Fund

Latino network action fund seeks to create a more representative democracy in oregon.

Community Improvement

Opportunity City Political Action Committee

Local ballot issue committee

—

Urban Phoenix Project Network

Raising awareness & inspiring action for quality urban spaces easily enjoyed by all. Lobbying the state legislature and municipalities on zoning reform options that provide for more urban and affordable options to live in. This includes…

—

Center for Intercultural Organizing

Center for intercultural organizing dba unite oregon is a diverse, grassroots organization working to build a multicultural movement for immigrant and refugee rights through education, civic engagement, community organizing and…

Civil Rights

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Drug Policy Alliance and the most unlike its peers is New Approach Montana. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

15 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

12/15

Grantees still filing

8/15

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Health$28,125,884Other$5,336,149Civil Rights$263,000Human Services$181,000Public Benefit$170,000Public Safety & Disaster$35,000

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.

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.

Northwest Health FoundationOR15.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Northwest Health Foundation · Northwest Health Foundation · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Tides Foundation

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 organisation DRUG POLICY ACTION 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

3get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%

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. 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

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: NEW APPROACH MONTANA.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

high risk

2 years of Form 990 filings, no recent filing.

Legal standing

medium risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 843244528 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on NEW APPROACH MONTANA, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
FlagSustained operations— No recent filing on record.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 78% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Drug Policy Action?

Find your warmest path to Drug Policy Action through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

DRUG POLICY ACTION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

15 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Drug Policy Action?

More from the funding graph

DRUG POLICY ACTION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

15 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Drug Policy Action?

More from the funding graph