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

· Public charity

Fairvote

FAIRVOTE is a nonpartisan organization seeking better elections for all.

$35k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Public Benefit$1.1MEnvironment$46kCivil Rights$35kSocial Science$1k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$20,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$6.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RANK MI VOTE$20,000
BUILDING POWER FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR$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 (FY19–20, $168k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%FAIRVOTE WASHINGTON: $88k → 9%FAIRVOTE WASHINGTON: $80k → 9%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

AK
ME
VT
WA
MI
MA
OR
WY
CA
UT
CO
MD
NM
KS
TN
DC
HI
GA
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.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$697k · 6 repeat orgs$465k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +85% since the first grant, against +64% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
23

Total granted

$697k
$430k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+85%
+64%

Still filing today

100%
78%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Public BenefitCivil RightsEnvironmentEducationHuman 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

  • MC
    Maine Citizens for Clean Elections
    3× · 2017–2022 · $153k · revenue +158%
  • RT
    RANK THE VOTE INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $150k · revenue +85%
  • FA
    FAIRVOTE ACTION
    3× · 2017–2022 · $109k · revenue ×24

Funded once

  • RE
    RepresentUs Education Fund
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -30%
  • UA
    UNITE AMERICA INSTITUTE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue +150%
  • RI
    REPRESENTWOMEN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue +151%
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
America Votes

The Organization was established to coordinate and promote progressive issues, policies, initiatives, and referenda, and to pursue electoral reform that expands access to the ballot.

Community Improvement
2
People's Independent Commission

Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay

—
3
Electoral Collective

Electoral Collective coordinates a broad-based coalition of existing entities active in the climate justice and community organizing space to raise public awareness and educational opportunities.

Civil Rights
4
RepresentUs

RepresentUs is America's leading nonpartisan grassroots organization working for a government accountable to the people. We unite people from all backgrounds to defend democracy, root out corruption, mobilize action, and support campaigns…

Public Benefit
5
Coalition for Dc Representation in Congress Education Fund

Founded in 1998, dc vote is a national citizen engagement and advocacy organization dedicated to strengthening democracy and securing equality for all in the district of columbia.

Education
6
Oregon Center for Voting & Elections

To teach the general public how ranked choice voting works and to promote the benefits of using it in elections.

Civil Rights
7
Right Vote Inc
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
Democracy Works Inc

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

Civil Rights
10
Progressive Change Institute

The progressive change institute develops and promotes public policy, fosters bottom-up democracy, and educates the public. this includes working to impact the mainstream political discourse and protect democracy.

Public Benefit
11
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
12
All Americans Vote

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

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Alaska Center Education Fund; the most unlike its peers is Earth Care International Earth Care New Mexico. 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

25 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. 25 of the 31 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
17/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Maine Citizens for Clean Elections: $152,500 · Civil RightsMaine Citizens for Clean Election…FIX DEMOCRACY FIRST EDUCATION FUND: $113,955 · Civil RightsFIX DEMOCRACY FIRST EDUCATION FUN…REPRESENTWOMEN INC: $50,000 · Civil RightsREPRESENTWOMEN INCBUILDING POWER FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR: $15,000 · Civil RightsBVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC: $12,150 · Civil RightsRANK THE VOTE INC: $150,000 · EducationRANK THE VOTE INCCalifornia RCV Institute Inc: $50,000 · EducationCalifornia RCV Insti…VOTER CHOICE EDUCATION FUND INC: $10,000 · EducationFAIRVOTE WASHINGTON: $168,350 · Human ServicesFAIRVOTE WASHINGTONCHAINBREAKER COLLECTIVE: $39,000 · Human ServicesCHAINBREAKER COLLECT…FAIRVOTE ACTION: $109,000 · OtherFAIRVOTE ACTIONUTAH VALLEY UNIVERSITY: $27,000 · OtherUTAH VALLEY UNIVERS…SAVE IRV MEMPHIS: $25,850 · OtherSAVE IRV MEMPHISRANK MI VOTE: $20,000 · OtherRANK MI VOTE+4 more: $13,000 · Other+4 moreRepresentUs Education Fund: $50,000 · Public BenefitRepresentUs Edu…UNITE AMERICA INSTITUTE INC: $50,000 · Public BenefitUNITE AMERICA I…STATE DEMOCRACY PROJECT: $25,000 · Public BenefitSTATE DEMOCRACY…COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $15,000 · Public BenefitCOMMON CAUSE ED…Loud Light: $5,500 · Public Benefit+3 more: $13,000 · Public Benefit+3 moreEARTH CARE INTERNATIONAL EARTH CARE NEW MEXICO: $20,000 · EnvironmentVERMONT PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH & EDUCATION FUND INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS: $5,000 · EnvironmentTHE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND: $5,000 · EnvironmentHAWAII ALLIANCE FOR PROGRESSIVE ACTION: $7,500 · Community Improvement
Civil Rights$343,605Education$210,000Human Services$207,350Other$194,850Public Benefit$158,500Environment$40,000Community Improvement$7,500

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 budgetFAIRVOTE WASHINGTON: $168,350 over 2y, 57% of budgetMaine Citizens for Clean Elections: $152,500 over 3y, 21% of budgetRANK THE VOTE INC: $150,000 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetFIX DEMOCRACY FIRST EDUCATION FUND: $113,955 over 4y, 34% of budgetFAIRVOTE ACTION: $109,000 over 3y, 24% of budgetRepresentUs Education Fund: $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetUNITE AMERICA INSTITUTE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetREPRESENTWOMEN INC: $50,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetCalifornia RCV Institute Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetCHAINBREAKER COLLECTIVE: $39,000 over 1y, 23% of budgetSTATE DEMOCRACY PROJECT: $25,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetEARTH CARE INTERNATIONAL EARTH CARE NEW MEXICO: $20,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetBUILDING POWER FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR: $15,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetCOMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC: $12,150 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetVERMONT PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH & EDUCATION FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetHAWAII ALLIANCE FOR PROGRESSIVE ACTION: $7,500 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetLoud Light: $5,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetAlaska Public Interest Research Group: $5,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetEQUALITY STATE POLICY CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION ON TOXICS: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE ALASKA CENTER EDUCATION FUND: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE EDUCATION FUND INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% 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.

Unite America Institu…Tides FoundationNew Venture FundWindward FundCalifornia Community …ImpactassetsincAmalgamated Charitabl…Boston Foundation IncAmerican Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…
Unite America Institute IncCO17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Unite America Institute Inc · Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Windward Fund · California Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Boston Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 70%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    7get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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.

    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 31 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 Fairvote’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