Skip to content
Fund for a Better Future Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Fund for a Better Future Inc

FUND FOR A BETTER FUTURE INC.'s mission is to promote the common good by upholding democratic values, protecting the environment, promoting health, and advancing social equity.

$11M
Granted FY2024still arriving
30
Grants FY2024still arriving
9
States reached
$1.5M
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 2024.

Environment$56MPublic Benefit$54MCivil Rights$24MHuman Services$3.0MCrime & Legal$2.0MAnimals$196kCommunity Improvement$100kPhilanthropy$20k
02FY2024 · 30 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k7 grants · $193k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $1.0M
  • $250k+14 grants · $9.5M
$200,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$14M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND$1,500,000
CLIMATE POWER$1,105,882
PRIORITIES USA$1,000,000
INDIVISIBLE PROJECT$750,000
ELECTORAL COLLECTIVE ACTION$750,000
TIDES ADVOCACY$750,000
TEXAS CAMPAIGN FOR THE ENVIRONMENT$530,000
YES ON PROP 4 CALIFORNIANS FOR SAFE DRINKING WATER & WILDFIRE PREVENTION$500,000
HIP HOP CAUCUS ACTION FUND$500,000
DEMOCRACY FORWARD$500,000
PENNSYLVANIA UNITED$500,000
CLEAN AIR ACTION FUND$450,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND$445,000
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC$250,000
FOOD & WATER ACTION FUND$200,000
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 (FY20–20, $196k) 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%ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION: $196k → 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

NH
WA
MT
MN
IL
WI
NY
OR
NV
PA
CA
CO
MO
WV
DC
HI
LA
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.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$103M · 17 repeat orgs$34M to everyone else

17 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
30

Total granted

$103M
$29M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-10%
+47%

Still filing today

100%
87%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4.6M went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentCivil RightsPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementEducationHuman ServicesOther
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

  • LO
    LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC
    4× · 2020–2024 · $14M · revenue +104%
  • IP
    INDIVISIBLE PROJECT
    5× · 2020–2024 · $4.3M · revenue +11%
  • CA
    CLEAN AIR ACTION FUND
    2× · 2023–2024 · $700k · revenue +91% · 88% of their budget

Funded once

  • CP
    CLIMATE POWER ACTION
    one grant, 2022 · $5.7M
  • AF
    AB FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $5.0M · revenue +260%
  • HM
    HOUSE MAJORITY FORWARDgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $3.0M · revenue +229%
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
Climate Equity Action Fund

The climate equity action fund (ceaf) works hand-in-hand with community-based partners in critical states across the country to secure and sustain policy wins for climate and clean energy. building on over a decade of trust with leading…

Environment
2
American Flood Coalition Inc

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

Environment
3
Climate Innovation Action Inc

To educate policymakers about climate policies generally and to directly advocate for specific legislation on climate change.

Environment
4
Nrdc Action Fund Inc

To build political support for advancing the goals of the natural resources defense council.

—
5
Partnership for Policy Integrity

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

Environment
6
Clean Future Action Fund Inc

To educate, lobby and advocate for policies that advance clean energy development and deployment.

Environment
7
Environment America Research and Policy Center Inc

The purpose of the corporation is to engage in public education within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code. the corporation may engage in public interest research, policy development, analysis, public education,…

Environment
8
Friends of the Earth (Action) Inc

To improve the environment through education and policy work, with an emphasis on pollution, climate change, and energy issues; and how congress and the administration stand on these issues.

—
9
Evergreen Action

Advocate for and reform to climate policies at the national and state level.

Human Services
10
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
11
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environment America Inc; the most unlike its peers is New Approach Montana. 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

65 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 65 of the 69 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.

12
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
63/65
Grantees still filing
34/65
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PRIORITIES USA: $44,285,000 · Civil RightsPRIORITIES USALEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $13,717,000 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INCINDIVISIBLE PROJECT: $4,250,000 · Civil RightsINDIVISIBLE PROJECT+9 more: $3,063,000 · Civil RightsCLIMATE POWER: $22,405,882 · EnvironmentCLIMATE POWERSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $1,770,000 · EnvironmentSIXTEEN THIRTY FUNDThe Partnership Project Action Fund: $1,169,260 · Environment+13 more: $2,764,700 · Environment+13 moreCLIMATE POWER ACTION: $5,700,000 · OtherCLIMATE POWER A…BBT INC: $5,040,000 · OtherBBT INCWORKMONEY INC: $2,940,000 · OtherWORKMONEY INCNEVADA ALLIANCE: $2,000,000 · OtherNEVADA ALLIANCETIDES ADVOCACY: $750,000 · Other+21 more: $2,130,000 · Other+21 moreAB FOUNDATION: $5,000,000 · Public BenefitAB FOUNDA…FUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION: $2,500,000 · Public BenefitFUTURE FO…DEMAND JUSTICE: $2,000,000 · Public BenefitDEMAND JU…CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND: $1,050,000 · Public BenefitCENTER FO…CLEAN AIR ACTION FUND: $700,000 · Public BenefitCLEAN AIR…RUN FOR SOMETHING ACTION FUND: $419,400 · Public Benefit+2 more: $100,000 · Public BenefitFAIR FIGHT ACTION INC: $8,037,000 · Education+1 more: $50,000 · EducationHOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD: $3,000,000 · Community ImprovementPATRIOT MAJORITY USA: $1,960,000 · Community ImprovementAmerica Votes: $250,000 · Community ImprovementUNITED STATES MEGAFIRE RESPONSE: $2,000,000 · Human ServicesANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION: $196,000 · Human Services
Civil Rights$65,315,000Environment$28,109,842Other$18,560,000Public Benefit$11,769,400Education$8,087,000Community Improvement$5,210,000Human Services$2,196,000

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 budgetPRIORITIES USA: $44,285,000 over 5y, 74% of budgetCLIMATE POWER: $22,405,882 over 2y, 60% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $13,717,000 over 4y, 9.3% of budgetFAIR FIGHT ACTION INC: $8,037,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetBBT INC: $5,040,000 over 3y, 28% of budgetAB FOUNDATION: $5,000,000 over 1y, 24% of budgetINDIVISIBLE PROJECT: $4,250,000 over 5y, 8.5% of budgetHOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD: $3,000,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetWORKMONEY INC: $2,940,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetFUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION: $2,500,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetDEMAND JUSTICE: $2,000,000 over 1y, 34% of budgetNEVADA ALLIANCE: $2,000,000 over 1y, 54% of budgetPATRIOT MAJORITY USA: $1,960,000 over 1y, 30% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $1,770,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetThe Partnership Project Action Fund: $1,169,260 over 3y, 5.9% of budgetCENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ACTION FUND: $1,050,000 over 2y, 7.8% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY: $750,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetElectoral Collective Action: $750,000 over 1y, 55% of budgetCLEAN AIR ACTION FUND: $700,000 over 2y, 88% of budgetPennsylvania United: $600,000 over 2y, 7.0% of budgetTexas Campaign for the Environment: $530,000 over 1y, 50% of budgetALL VOTING IS LOCAL ACTION: $500,000 over 2y, 24% of budgetCALIFORNIANS FOR SAFE DRINKING WATER AND WILDFIRE PREVENTION: $500,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetDEMOCRACY FORWARD: $500,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetHIP HOP CAUCUS ACTION FUND: $500,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetENERGY ACTION FUND: $500,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetVOTO LATINO INC: $450,000 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND: $445,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetRUN FOR SOMETHING ACTION FUND: $419,400 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetBLACK MEN VOTE CIVIC ACTION FUND: $400,000 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetAmerica Votes: $250,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetFOOD & WATER ACTION FUND: $200,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION: $196,000 over 1y, 23% of budgetENVIRONMENT AMERICA INC: $152,500 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetBLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITION: $125,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetFORWARD ACTION FUND: $125,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetFor West Virginia's Future Inc: $125,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetClean Energy For America Inc: $120,000 over 1y, 8.7% of budgetBlueGreen Alliance Inc: $120,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetNew Approach Montana: $100,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetVOTEVETS ACTION FUND INC: $100,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetWILDERNESS SOCIETY ACTION FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetCALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS: $88,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetRESOURCES LEGACY FUND: $65,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION: $60,000 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetSUPERMAJORITY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetNORTH FUND: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL REDISTRICTING ACTION FUND: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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 FundOpen Society Action F…America VotesTides AdvocacyOur American Future A…NEO Philanthropy Acti…Way to Win Action Fun…League of Conservatio…Hopewell FundNational Education As…Future Forward USA Ac…Advocacy Action Fund …
Sixteen Thirty FundDC66× affinity32 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Open Society Action Fund Inc · America Votes · Tides Advocacy · Our American Future Action · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · League of Conservation Voters Inc · Hopewell Fund · National Education Association of the United States · Future Forward USA Action · Advocacy Action Fund 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 Fund for a Better Future Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fund for a Better Future Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Fund for a Better Future Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Fund for a Better Future Inc 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 69 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 Fund for a Better Future’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