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

· Public charity

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 discourse.

$1.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$1.1M
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 2025.

Public Benefit$14MCivil Rights$3.9MHuman Services$3.0MInternational$1.0MArts & Culture$200kHealth$150kCommunity Improvement$25k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.4M
$315,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FORWARD MAJORITY ACTION$1,065,000
BARBED WIRE MEDIA$315,000
AMERICA VOTES$50,000
TEXAS FUTURE COOPERATIVE$10,000
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 (FY23–24, $3.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%NORTH STAR PROSPERITY: $1.5M → 14%NORTH STAR PROSPERITY: $1.5M → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
IL
WI
MI
OR
NV
PA
VA
MD
AZ
DC
GA
TX
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.

49%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$11M · 8 repeat orgs$11M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +189% since the first grant, against +2% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
15

Total granted

$11M
$11M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+189%
+2%

Still filing today

75%
73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $315k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Public BenefitCivil RightsHuman ServicesHealthCommunity 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

  • AI
    AMERICAN INDEPENDENT MEDIA
    2× · 2022–2023 · $200k · revenue ×11 · 89% of their budget
  • TV
    THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER
    2× · 2021–2023 · $112k · revenue +432%
  • AV
    America Votes
    2× · 2022–2025 · $60k · revenue +189%

Funded once

  • AF
    AB FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $3.0M · revenue ×12 · 50% of their budget
  • VA
    VOTEVETS ACTION FUND INCgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $2.0M · revenue +49%
  • ND
    NEW DAY NEVADA
    one grant, 2023 · $1.9M · revenue +2% · 98% of their budget
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
People's Independent Commission

Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay

—
2
Democracy Works Inc

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

Civil Rights
3
Commission On Presidential Debates

Organize general election presidential and vice-presidential debates

Civil Rights
4
All Americans Vote

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

Civil Rights
5
Americans for Tax Reform

American for Tax Reform (ATR) is a national grassroots organization focused on increasing public awareness about the size and regulations of government and rallying support for lower taxes, smaller government and congressional…

—
6
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
7
Democracy Forward

See schedule o.this organization seeks to build collective power to defend and advance a vibrant democracy that benefits all people.

—
8
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
9
American Workers for Progress

American workers for progress works to ensure that leaders at every level are focused on reducing barriers to job growth and addressing economic challenges to guarantee a better future for all americans.

—
10
Texans for Vaccine Choice

Texans for vaccine choice exists to directly influence vaccine choice public policy and legislation

Health
11
Institute for Public Accuracy

To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.

Arts & Culture
12
Defend the Vote Action Fund

To sustain and support the prioritization of comprehensive voting rights and democracy reform legislation at all levels of government.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The American Independent Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Better Pennsylvania Inc. 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

18 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. 18 of the 24 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.

6
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/18
Grantees still filing
9/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FORWARD MAJORITY ACTION: $6,522,277 · OtherFORWARD MAJORITY ACTIONVOTEVETS ACTION FUND INC: $2,000,000 · OtherVOTEVETS ACTION FUND INCNEW DAY NEVADA: $1,950,000 · OtherNEW DAY NEVADAGUARDING AGAINST PANDEMICS: $1,000,000 · OtherGUARDING AGAINST PANDEMICSBETTER PENNSYLVANIA INC: $550,000 · Other+8 more: $2,086,000 · Other+8 moreAB FOUNDATION: $3,000,000 · Public BenefitAB FOUNDATIONFREEDOM VIRGINIA INC: $270,000 · Public BenefitFREEDOM VIRGINIA I…AMERICAN INDEPENDENT MEDIA: $200,000 · Public BenefitAMERICAN INDEPENDE…FUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION: $150,000 · Public BenefitNORTH STAR PROSPERITY: $3,000,000 · Human ServicesNORTH STAR PROS…CENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION: $552,410 · Civil RightsMARYLAND RISE INC: $250,000 · Civil RightsTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $112,378 · Civil Rights+1 more: $10,000 · Civil RightsCOMMITTEE TO PROTECT HEALTH CARE: $150,000 · HealthAmerica Votes: $60,000 · Community Improvement
Other$14,108,277Public Benefit$3,620,000Human Services$3,000,000Civil Rights$924,788Health$150,000Community Improvement$60,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAB FOUNDATION: $3,000,000 over 1y, 50% of budgetNORTH STAR PROSPERITY: $3,000,000 over 2y, 46% of budgetVOTEVETS ACTION FUND INC: $2,000,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetNEW DAY NEVADA: $1,950,000 over 1y, 98% of budgetCENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION: $552,410 over 3y, 10% of budgetBETTER PENNSYLVANIA INC: $550,000 over 1y, 34% of budgetTHE WISCONSIN INITIATIVE INC: $450,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetFREEDOM VIRGINIA INC: $270,000 over 2y, 19% of budgetTHE AMERICAN INDEPENDENT FOUNDATION: $260,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetMARYLAND RISE INC: $250,000 over 1y, 54% of budgetAMERICAN INDEPENDENT MEDIA: $200,000 over 2y, 89% of budgetCOMMITTEE TO PROTECT HEALTH CARE: $150,000 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetFUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION: $150,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $112,378 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetAmerica Votes: $60,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLead Texas Forward Inc: $36,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetARIZONA WINS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% 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 FundHopewell FundOur American Future A…Tides FoundationEvidence for ImpactWay to Win Action Fun…America Votes
Sixteen Thirty FundDC31.6× affinity13 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Hopewell Fund · Our American Future Action · Tides Foundation · Evidence for Impact · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · America Votes

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%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, FY20–24
    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 Fair Democracy?

    Find your warmest path to Fair Democracy 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 24 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Fair Democracy’s 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