Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Public charity

Far Star Action Fund

Supports programs in steam education, good governance, and climate advocacy-seeking creative solutions to the world's challenges.

$2.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$550k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
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 FY2018–2024.

Environment$2.7MPublic Benefit$2.5MScience & Tech$1.6MCommunity Improvement$650kCivil Rights$175kHuman Services$125kPhilanthropy$100kArts & Culture$50kOther$0
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $575k
  • $250k+4 grants · $1.9M
$125,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$4.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LCV LEAGUE CONSERVATION OF VOTERS - LCV VICTORY FUND$550,000
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC$550,000
NO ON 2117$500,000
GIFFORDS$250,000
SUGARCANE FILM LLC$125,000
HOUSE MAJORITY PAC$125,000
SENATE MAJORITY PAC$125,000
AMERICA VOTES$100,000
CLIMATE POWER$100,000
TOGETHER FOR PROGRESS 2024$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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 92% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%REPRESENTUS EDUCATION FUND: $25k → 12%REDFORD CENTER INC: $100k → 10%FUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE INC: $500k → 12%CLIMATE POWER: $100k → 14%FAIR FIGHT ACTION INC: $50k → 14%EXPOSURE LABS LLC: $600k → 12%OHIO CAMPUS CONTACT: $20k → 10%GRIST MAGAZINE INC: $200k → 9%SUGARCANE FILM LLC: $125k → 10%MEDIATORS BEYOND BORDERS FDN: $25k → 7%REDFORD CENTER INC: $75k → 10%CLIMATE POWER: $100k → 14%EXPOSURE LABS LLC: $500k → 12%OHIO CAMPUS COMPACT: $20k → 10%WASHINGTON CONSERVATION VOTERS: $150k → 9%REDFORD CENTER INC: $50k → 10%ENDING CITIZENS UNITED ACTION FUND: $25k → 14%EXPOSURE LABS LLC: $115k → 12%FUSE WASHINGTON: $25k → 9%REDFORD CENTER INC: $20k → 10%LCV LEAGUE CONSERVATION OF VOTERS - LCV VICTORY FUND: $550k → 14%FUSE WASHINGTON: $25k → 9%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $550k → 14%FUSE WASHINGTON: $25k → 9%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $250k → 14%AUGUST ISLAND PICTURES: $50k → 9%GIFFORDS: $250k → 14%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $250k → 14%HOUSE MAJORITY PAC: $125k → 14%SENATE MAJORITY PAC: $125k → 14%HOUSE MAJORITY PAC: $125k → 14%HOUSE MAJORITY PAC: $125k → 14%SENATE MAJORITY PAC: $125k → 14%HOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD: $125k → 14%SENATE MAJORITY PAC: $125k → 14%LCV VICTORY FUND: $100k → 14%DEMOCRATIC GOVERNER'S ASSOCTION: $50k → 14%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $50k → 14%NATIONAL REDISTRICTING ACTION FUND: $25k → 14%AMERICAN BRIDGE: $125k → 14%AMERICAN BRIDGE 21ST CENTURY FOUNDATION: $100k → 14%AMERICAN BRIDGE 21ST CENTURY FOUNDATION: $100k → 14%BUILDING BACK TOGETHER: $50k → 14%SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $100k → 14%AMERICA VOTES: $100k → 14%NORTH FUND: $75k → 14%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

WA
MA
OH
CA
CO
VA
DE
DC
GA

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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$5.7M · 12 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +39% since the first grant, against -79% for the ones you funded once.

12 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
11

Total granted

$5.7M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
-79%

Still filing today

67%
73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $875k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Community ImprovementEnvironmentCivil RightsEducationPublic BenefitHuman ServicesOther

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

  • LO
    LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +39%
  • G
    GIFFORDS
    2× · 2022–2024 · $525k · revenue +88%
  • HM
    HOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD
    3× · 2021–2023 · $375k · revenue +714%

Funded once

  • FF
    FUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE INC
    one grant, 2021 · $500k · revenue -89%
  • Grist Magazine Incgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $200k · revenue +196%
  • WC
    WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION
    one grant, 2020 · $150k · revenue +18%

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
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
2
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
3
Floodlight Inc

Floodlight is an environmental news organization that investigates the people and corporations stalling climate action. We collaborate with local and nonprofit publications.

Arts & Culture
4
Rogue Climate

Rogue Climate's mission is to empower Southern Oregon communities most impacted by climate change including low-income, rural, youth, seniors & communities of color, to win climate justice by organizing for clean energy, sustainable jobs &…

Education
5
Amazon Conservation Association

Amazon conservation unites science, people, and innovation to protect the amazon - the greatest wild forest on earth. as guardians of the most iconic forest on the planet, we bring together the power of the latest science and technology…

Environment
6
Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology Inc

Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.

Science & Tech
7
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
8
Global Forest Generation

Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…

Environment
9
Nextgen Climate Action

Nextgen america empowers young people to engage in the democratic process through voter registration and civic engagement on issues of public policy. this is achieved through innovative digital outreach, communications, and grassroots…

Unclassified
10
The Alliance for Collective Action

The Alliance for Collective Action convenes leaders of environmental and social movements to advance solutions for a thriving planet. We advance our mission through the Alliance Center building and community, as well as through Collective…

Environment
11
American Flood Coalition Inc

To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.

Environment
12
Policy Action for a Clean Tomorrow Inc

Clean Tomorrow advances policies that reduce climate emissions by turning policy ambition into action. We work to catalyze rapid change that will accelerate the innovation and growth of clean energy.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is House Majority Forward and the most unlike its peers is No on 2117 Committee. 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

20 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. 20 of the 30 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
10/20
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

EXPOSURE LABS — $1,610,000 · OtherEXPOSURE LABSLCV VICTORY FUND — $650,000 · OtherLCV VICTORY FUNDNo on 2117 Committee — $500,000 · OtherNo on 2117 CommitteeSMP — $375,000 · OtherSMPCLIMATE POWER — $200,000 · OtherWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION — $150,000 · Other+7 more — $450,000 · Other+7 moreGIFFORDS — $525,000 · Community ImprovementGIFFORDSFUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE INC — $500,000 · Community ImprovementFUND FOR A BETTER FUT…HOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD — $375,000 · Community ImprovementHOUSE MAJORITY FORWAR…America Votes — $100,000 · Community ImprovementAmerica VotesLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $1,100,000 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF CONSER…+2 more — $50,000 · Civil RightsREDFORD CENTER INC — $245,000 · EnvironmentREDFORD C…Grist Magazine Inc — $200,000 · EnvironmentGrist Mag…Fuse Washington — $125,000 · EnvironmentFuse Wash…SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND — $100,000 · EnvironmentSIXTEEN T…AB FOUNDATION — $325,000 · Public BenefitNORTH FUND — $75,000 · Public BenefitRepresentUs Education Fund — $25,000 · Public BenefitEVERGREEN ACTION — $175,000 · Human ServicesFAIR FIGHT ACTION INC — $50,000 · EducationOHIO CAMPUS COMPACT — $40,000 · Education
Other$3,935,000Community Improvement$1,500,000Civil Rights$1,150,000Environment$670,000Public Benefit$425,000Human Services$175,000Education$90,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $1,100,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetGIFFORDS — $525,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetNo on 2117 Committee — $500,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetFUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE INC — $500,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetHOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD — $375,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetAB FOUNDATION — $325,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetREDFORD CENTER INC — $245,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetGrist Magazine Inc — $200,000 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetEVERGREEN ACTION — $175,000 over 3y, 3.8% of budgetWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION — $150,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetFuse Washington — $125,000 over 4y, 4.8% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND — $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAmerica Votes — $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTH FUND — $75,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBBT INC — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFAIR FIGHT ACTION INC — $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetOHIO CAMPUS COMPACT — $40,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetRepresentUs Education Fund — $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNATIONAL REDISTRICTING ACTION FUND — $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEND CITIZENS UNITED LET AMERICA VOTE ACTION FUND — $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 FundFund for a Better Fut…Our American Future A…America VotesTides AdvocacyHopewell FundWellness Advocacy FundThe Heising-Simons Ac…League of Conservatio…National Education As…Brick by Brick Founda…Advocacy Action Fund …
Sixteen Thirty FundDC29.4× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Fund for a Better Future Inc · Our American Future Action · America Votes · Tides Advocacy · Hopewell Fund · Wellness Advocacy Fund · The Heising-Simons Action Fund · League of Conservation Voters Inc · National Education Association of the United States · Brick by Brick Foundation · Advocacy 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 Far Star Action Fund 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%your 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
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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.

    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 30 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2024, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines