· Public charity
Fuse Washington
To achieve progress through government,by the people, and for the people, in Washington state.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $7k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $126k
- $50k–250k7 grants · $453k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Michigan Civic Action Fund | $100,000 |
| PA Alliance Action | $88,000 |
| Power to the Polls | $65,000 |
| Strategic Victory Fund | $50,000 |
| Rural Arizona Action Fund | $50,000 |
| In Union USA Action | $50,000 |
| Our Voice Our Vote | $50,000 |
| Together Wisconsin Acts | $35,000 |
| NC A Philip Randolph Educational Fund | $28,000 |
| Somos Votantes | $25,000 |
| For Our Future | $25,000 |
| Together for Progress | $12,500 |
| Together for Pierce County | $7,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $395k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 93% of those 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
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.
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.
11 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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 FY2025, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $185k 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
- GIGeorgia Investor Action Fund Inc3× · 2020–2022 · $367k · revenue +232%
- PAPA ALLIANCE ACTION5× · 2020–2025 · $158k · revenue +98%
- MCMICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND3× · 2020–2025 · $155k · revenue +231%
Funded once
- TFTogether for Progressone grant, 2023 · $370k
- ABA BETTER BIG SKYgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $260k · revenue +386%
- PRPiedmont Rising Incone grant, 2020 · $175k · revenue -99%
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.
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.
Oklahoma Forward works to identify what everyday Oklahomans care about, and help to give them a stronger voice in state government. By creating an environment where Oklahoma voters feel empowered, we can encourage a positive conversation…
To ensure that working class people are educated on their voting rights. The coalition engages in mobilization and educational information sessions to ensure that all workers voices are heard.
Research analyze publish information to public on elections election systems laws and campaign financing.
Informed and educated the public and lawmakers about the benefits of including independent voters in Pennsylvania's primary elections.
Voter education around policy
Progress arizona is an arizona nonprofit corporation located in phoenix, arizona. progress arizona is an organization founded in 2018 to educate the public about key policy issues using digital organizing and communications.
Organize for justice develops diverse campaign leadership by passing on innovations and relationships from one generation of organizers to the next. the organization strives to create public support on issues affecting working americans.
To improve the election process by making the act of voting more accessible to citizens, to lessen the influence of money in politics and to generally make elected officials more responsive to the citizens of North Carolina.
Non-PartisanVoter Educ Advocacy
Colorado people's action (cpa) is a member-driven, racial justice organization dedicated to winning long-lasting progressive public policies in colorado. cpa builds power by mobilizing voters, electing our own people to office, holding…
Democracy North Carolina's mission is to strengthen democratic structures, build power among disenfranchised communities, and inspire confidence in a transformed political process that works for all.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is For Our Future Action Fund and the most unlike its peers is Fuerte Arts Movement. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
26 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. 26 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.
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 Georgia Investor Action Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds A BETTER BIG SKY ↗
- Who funds Piedmont Rising Inc ↗
- Who funds PA ALLIANCE ACTION ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds Make North Carolina First ↗
- Who funds In Union USA Action ↗
- Who funds POWER TO THE POLLS INC ↗
- Who funds STRATEGIC VICTORY FUND ↗
- Who funds TOGETHER WISCONSIN ACTS INC ↗
- Who funds ARIZONA WINS ↗
- Who funds RURAL ARIZONA ACTION ↗
- Who funds OUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds Defend Washington ↗
- Who funds NORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND ↗
- Who funds FORWARD ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds FOR OUR FUTURE ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE FOR NC ↗
- Who funds Alaska Progressive Donor Table ↗
- Who funds Fuerte Arts Movement ↗
- Who funds ONEAMERICA VOTES ↗
- Who funds COURAGE CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds Fuse Washington ↗
- Who funds PROGRESS NOW INC ↗
- Who funds PENNSYLVANIA STANDS UP INC ↗
- Who funds SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND ↗
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: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Tides Advocacy · America Votes · State Engagement Fund · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Strategic Victory Fund · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Tides Foundation · North Fund · Democracyfirst · Pro-Democracy Campaign
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 Fuse Washington 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.