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

· Public charity

Focus for Democracy Fund

FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND educates donors, raises funds, and makes grants to nonprofit organizations that promote civic engagement and strengthen democratic participation.

$4.7M
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$1.3M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $95k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $575k
  • $250k+7 grants · $4.0M
$200,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ACCELERATE CHANGE INC$1,300,000
SOUTHERN VISION ALLIANCE$1,081,507
COURIER NEWSROOM$432,252
WORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND$389,345
NEW VENTURE FUND$300,000
PUBLIC DEMOCRACY AMERICA$250,000
THE JUSTICE PROJECT ACTION$250,000
HEADCOUNT INC$200,000
PEOPLE NOT POLITICIANS$200,000
ASIAN AMERICAN VOICES MEDIA$65,000
VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER$59,639
COALITION FOR CIVIC DUTY$50,000
BLACK VOTERS MATTER FUND$40,000
NEO PHILANTHROPY INC$25,000
PODER LATINX$20,000
02The need
02

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY24–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 93% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%THE JUSTICE PROJECT ACTION: $250k → 7%ACCELERATE CHANGE INC: $1.3M → 16%TIDES FOUNDATION: $1.0M → 10%NEO PHILANTHROPY INC: $25k → 17%NOTLEY IMPACT: $32k → 10%COALITION FOR CIVIC DUTY: $50k → 14%ASIAN AMERICAN VOICES MEDIA: $65k → 9%BLACK VOTERS MATTER FUND: $40k → 13%ACCELERATE CHANGE INC: $41k → 16%HEADCOUNT INC: $200k → 17%PUBLIC DEMOCRACY AMERICA: $250k → 14%COURIER NEWSROOM: $432k → 17%NEW VENTURE FUND: $300k → 14%VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $60k → 14%HOPEWELL FUND: $25k → 14%WORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND: $389k → 14%PODER LATINX: $20k → 14%WORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND: $22k → 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.
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 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
Democracy Works Inc

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

Civil Rights
2
Voteamerica

The mission of voteamerica is to strengthen united states democracy by increasing voter turnout.

Civil Rights
3
New Media Ventures

We believe that by changing where capital is invested, we can shift the structures of power to benefit more people.

Public Benefit
4
Voteorg

Vote.org's primary purpose is to build web-based technologies that remove barriers to voting and increase vote turnout.

Civil Rights
5
Verified Voting Foundation

Strengthen democracy for all voters by promoting the responsible use of technology in all elections.

—
6
Public Agenda Inc

Public agenda strengthens american democracy by connecting research to action enabling people and institutions to pursue changes that make a difference. we amplify the voices of americans and help communities discover and build on common…

—
7
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
8
Register America

The organization is founded for social welfare purposes, including assisting with voter registration and advocating for policies which lead to increased voter registration in the united states.

—
9
One for Democracy Action Fund

One for democracy unlocks resources to build a healthy democracy by fostering meaningful relationships between philanthropists and the democracy leaders of our time.

—
10
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
11
Voter Formation Project

Voter formation project's mission is to increase participation in local, state, and national elections through digital communication, experimentation, and knowledge-sharing.

Civil Rights
12
La Voice Action

La voice action's mission is to build multi-racial, interfaith power to win policies that transforms los angeles into a county that reflects the human dignity of all people, with racial equity and abundance for all.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Accelerate Change Inc; the most unlike its peers is Asian American Voices Media. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

16 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. 16 of the 19 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
7/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ACCELERATE CHANGE INC: $1,341,195 · Civil RightsACCELERATE CHANGE INCHEAD COUNT INC: $200,000 · Civil RightsHEAD COUNT INCTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $59,639 · Civil Rights+2 more: $30,000 · Civil RightsSOUTHERN VISION ALLIANCE: $1,081,507 · Public BenefitSOUTHERN VISION ALLIA…+1 more: $25,000 · Public BenefitTIDES FOUNDATION: $1,000,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATION+1 more: $25,213 · PhilanthropyCOURIER NEWSROOM INC: $432,252 · OtherCOURIER NEWSROO…PEOPLE NOT POLITICIANS: $200,000 · OtherPEOPLE NOT POLI…ASIAN AMERICAN VOICES MEDIA: $65,000 · OtherASIAN AMERICAN …COALITION FOR CIVIC DUTY: $50,000 · OtherCOALITION FOR C…Black Voters Matter Fund Inc: $40,000 · OtherNEW VENTURE FUND: $300,000 · EnvironmentNEW VENTUR…PUBLIC DEMOCRACY AMERICA: $250,000 · EnvironmentPUBLIC DEM…WORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND: $411,496 · EducationNOTLEY IMPACT: $32,160 · EducationTHE JUSTICE PROJECT ACTION: $250,000 · Community Improvement
Civil Rights$1,630,834Public Benefit$1,106,507Philanthropy$1,025,213Other$787,252Environment$550,000Education$443,656Community Improvement$250,000

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 budgetACCELERATE CHANGE INC: $1,341,195 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $1,000,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetWORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND: $411,496 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetTHE JUSTICE PROJECT ACTION: $250,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetASIAN AMERICAN VOICES MEDIA: $65,000 over 1y, 46% of budgetNOTLEY IMPACT: $32,160 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND: $25,213 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetASIAN AMERICAN ADVOCACY FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Focus for Democracy Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Focus for Democracy Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%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, FY20–25
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Focus for Democracy Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Focus for Democracy Fund 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 19 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 Focus for 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