How much did EQUAL JUSTICE WORKS grant in FY2023?

Crime & Legal$25MCivil Rights$6.4MHuman Services$4.1MEducation$2.3MHealth$1.0MPublic Benefit$812kPhilanthropy$709kHousing & Shelter$566kEnvironment$350kOther$17M

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

nlsregardoriginimmigration lawrepresentativedeliveringhealth substance

2020

indianself-reliancecoalitionslrpblack transgender diversetitle

2021

lgbtq aanhpiqueer asianslcprison systemmuslimnative hawaiianmount sinai

2022

aolpower immigrantachieve dignityliberalawoodeast africanthousands

2023

north pennpenn legalhiv aidsfood insecurityemergency sheltereducate empowerhandling

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

03FY2023 · 175 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

Under $10k21 grants · $147k
$10k–50k25 grants · $752k
$50k–250k127 grants · $9.6M
$250k+2 grants · $549k

$57,000

Median grant

States reached

$42M

Total assets

Largest grants

NEIGHBORHOOD LEGAL SERVICES OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY$278,288
LAWNDALE CHRISTIAN LEGAL CENTER$271,100
ALASKA LEGAL SERVICES$221,100
SOUTH CAROLINA LEGAL SERVICES INC$181,026
TEXAS CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT$172,917
TEXAS RIOGRANDE LEGAL AID INC$171,100
NEW YORK LEGAL ASSISTANCE GROUP$164,300
KENTUCKY LEGAL AID$159,000
GIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY$157,000
SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA LEGAL SERVICES$153,550
LEGAL AID OF WEST VIRGINIA$145,524
DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA$137,398
CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS$132,433
NATIONAL REDISTRICTING FOUNDATION$131,418
LEGAL AID CHICAGO$120,600

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 (FY18–23, $3.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16% — the area typically sits at 11%. 94% 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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$55M · 306 repeat orgs$4.4M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +77% since the first grant, against +61% for the ones you funded once.

306 repeat relationships — 138 still active in FY2023, 168 since wound down; 37 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

306

Total granted

$55M

$2.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+77%

+61%

Still filing today

95%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.7M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Crime & LegalCivil RightsHuman ServicesEducationHealthPublic BenefitOther

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

TR
TEXAS RIOGRANDE LEGAL AID INC
7× · 2018–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +35%
LS
LONE STAR LEGAL AID
6× · 2018–2023 · $978k · revenue +57%
NM
NEW MEXICO IMMIGRANT LAW CENTER
7× · 2018–2024 · $844k · revenue +19%

Funded once

GL
GEORGIA LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAMgraduated
2× · 2020–2024 · $107k · revenue +74%
LA
LEGAL AID OF WESTERN MISSOURI
one grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue +14%
MF
MOSAIC FAMILY SERVICESgraduated
one grant, 2020 · $90k · revenue +85%

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.

Lakeshore Legal Aid

Standing with our neighbors, Lakeshore Legal Aid fights poverty and injustice through advocacy and by providing meaningful and dignified access to the legal system.

Crime & Legal

Legal Services Corporation

To promote equal access to justice in our nation and to provide high quality civil legal assistance to low-income individuals and families.

Crime & Legal

Legal Aid of East Tennessee

Legal representation, counseling and other civil legal services for the indigent of tennessee

—

Legal Services of Central New York Inc

Legal services of central new york (lscny)is a 501c3 non-profit law firm that helps people and communities in central new york change law, policy, and systems to promote equity and create pathways out of poverty for low-income families and…

Crime & Legal

Legal Link

Legal Link removes legal barriers that prolong poverty by adding critically needed capacity to the legal ecosystem. We embed legal navigation support in community-based settings by training and supporting frontline partners.

Crime & Legal

Community Legal Aid Socal

To provide civil legal services to low-income individuals and to promote equal access to the justice system through advocacy, legal counseling, innovative self-help services, in depth legal representation, community education, and economic…

Crime & Legal

Legal Aid Association of California

LAAC is the statewide membership of civil legal nonprofits. We serve our community and their clients by advocating for more legal aid funding, by training legal aid staff, and by coordinating and connecting advocates throughout the state.

—

Justice for the People Legal Center

The Justice for the People Legal Center is working to bring a local organizing approach to the legal world and protect tenants against predatory landlords.

—

New Civil Liberties Alliance

Public interest legal activities

Arts & Culture

603 Legal Aid

To make access to justice a reality by providing civil legal services to people in need.

Crime & Legal

Afl-Cio Union Lawyers Alliance

Afl-cio union lawyers alliance was established to better the conditions of workers and their families by enhancing the quality of legal representation that is available to the afl-cio and the national and international unions affiliated…

—

Legalcorps

LegalCORPS' mission expands access to business law services for individuals and organizations to promote economic development and stabilize communities. Economic justice means that everyone has opportunities to participate and thrive in…

Crime & Legal

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Leadership Counsel for Justice and and the most unlike its peers is Roderick and Solange MacArthur. 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.

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 44 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.7% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.7%3/450

the rest of the field

11%

206,161/1,819,115

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.

05the grantee network

434 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)

161

Early backer (in before they grew)

429/434

Grantees still filing

382/434

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Crime & Legal$25,389,898Other$19,081,866Civil Rights$6,404,591Human Services$4,129,491Education$2,254,568Health$1,029,063Public Benefit$812,334

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.

Legal Services CorporationDC173.1× affinity87 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Legal Services Corporation · The Skadden Foundation · American College of Bankruptcy · The Sidley Austin Foundation · The Morrison & Foerster Foundation · California Access to Justice Commission · Vera Institute of Justice Inc · Immigrant Justice Corps Inc · Borealis Philanthropy · The New York Bar Foundation · The Impact Fund · Venable Foundation 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 organisation EQUAL JUSTICE WORKS 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 moneyreceives it· size = income

8get no government money at all

2rely on government for over half their income

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: MAKE THE ROAD NEW JERSEY.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~15 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.8× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 264648049 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 MAKE THE ROAD NEW JERSEY, 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

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 15 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 31% of their budget — diversified.
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 Equal Justice Works?

Find your warmest path to Equal Justice Works 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.

EQUAL JUSTICE WORKS

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

434 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Equal Justice Works?

More from the funding graph

EQUAL JUSTICE WORKS

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

434 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Equal Justice Works?

More from the funding graph