· Public charity
Fund for Constitutional Government
Fcg is a hub for dynamic projects promoting democracy, government and corporate transparency, fair economies, and the fights against corruption and climate change.
Read this first · the figures below need context
58% of Fund for Constitutional Government’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Charities Aid Foundation America, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 6 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2023, the last year Fund for Constitutional Government named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $190k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 7 grants below total $190,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $212,409 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $22,409 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| R STREET INSTITUTE | $40,000 |
| PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT | $30,000 |
| GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT | $30,000 |
| PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT | $25,000 |
| UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY | $25,000 |
| INKSTICK MEDIA | $20,000 |
| CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL POLICY | $20,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 90% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
Grants abroad, by region — $166k on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: TI-US SUBGRANT AS PART OF THE CARNEGIE DEFENSE AND SECURITY FUNDING AGREEMENT · STROIKA SUBGRANT FOR THE PRODUCTION OF NONFICTION BOOKS
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +42% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2023, 8 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call). Read against FY2023, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $100k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- POPROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC7× · 2017–2023 · $486k · revenue +17%
NEO Philanthropy Inc2× · 2021–2022 · $402k · revenue +17%- GAGovernment Accountability Project7× · 2017–2023 · $305k · revenue +49%
Funded once
- USUNITED STATES PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP EDUCATION FUND INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $95k · revenue +88%
- CFCENTER FOR AI AND DIGITAL POLICYgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $77k · revenue +94% · 30% of their budget
- NTNATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNIONone grant, 2022 · $45k · revenue +9%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…
The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
To educate journalists and the public, and foster public debate, about improving political journalism to reflect public needs and hold the powerful accountable.
Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. Pew Research Center generates a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue and…
International consortium of investigative journalists, inc.'s (icij) mission is to show people how the world really works through stories that rock the world; forcing positive change.
The institute works as a public education organization that focuses on a wide spectrum of rapidly evolving foreign policy and international issues.
The manhattan institute is a community of scholars, journalists, activists, and civic leaders dedicated to advancing opportunity, individual liberty, and the rule of law in america and its great cities.
Iri advances freedom and democracy worldwide by developing political parties, civic institutions, open elections, democratic governance and the rule of law.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United States Public Interest Research Group Education Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is Colombe Peace Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 32 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
35 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. 35 of the 40 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC ↗
- Who funds NEO Philanthropy Inc ↗
- Who funds Government Accountability Project ↗
- Who funds CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA ↗
- Who funds ELECTRONIC PRIVACY INFORMATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds JUBILEE USA NETWORK ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds R STREET INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Global Financial Integrity ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds TAXPAYERS FOR COMMON SENSE ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR AI AND DIGITAL POLICY ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE ON TAXATION AND ECONOMIC POLICY ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL POLICY INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL TAXPAYERS UNION ↗
- Who funds TYPE MEDIA CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds PUSHBLACK ↗
- Who funds UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ↗
- Who funds FAIR COUNT INC ↗
- Who funds VOTE RUN LEAD INC ↗
- Who funds PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Inkstick Media Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds FAIR SHARE EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR A JUST SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds COLOMBE PEACE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC CONCERN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds BROWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE WOMENS MEDIA CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS & EDITORS INC ↗
- Who funds THE LENS ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR NONPROFIT NEWS ↗
- Who funds The Center for Investigative Reporting Inc ↗
- Who funds THE TEXAS DEMOCRACY FOUNDATION ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Spectemur Agendo Inc · The Ford Foundation · Foundation to Promote Open Society · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · New Venture Fund · Tides Foundation · Skoll Fund · Institute for Nonprofit News · Rockefeller Family 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 Fund for Constitutional Government 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.
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.