Skip to content
Fuse Washington at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Fuse Washington

To achieve progress through government,by the people, and for the people, in Washington state.

$562k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2025.

Civil Rights$1.2MPublic Benefit$743kHuman Services$367kCommunity Improvement$290kHealth$65kEducation$20kEnvironment$5k
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $126k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $453k
$50,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$299k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Michigan Civic Action Fund$100,000
PA Alliance Action$88,000
Power to the Polls$65,000
Strategic Victory Fund$50,000
In Union USA Action$50,000
Rural Arizona Action Fund$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
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 (FY20–25, $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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NC A Philip Randolph Educational Fund: $28k → 8%Georgia Investor Action Fund: $322k → 14%Georgia Investor Action Fund Inc: $30k → 14%Georgia Investor Action Fund Inc: $15k → 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

AK
NH
WA
MT
WI
MI
IA
PA
CA
AZ
NC
DC
GA
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.

58%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.6M · 11 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
12

Total granted

$1.6M
$950k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+8%

Still filing today

82%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $185k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesPublic BenefitEducationHealthOther
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

  • GI
    Georgia Investor Action Fund Inc
    3× · 2020–2022 · $367k · revenue +232%
  • PA
    PA ALLIANCE ACTION
    5× · 2020–2025 · $158k · revenue +98%
  • MC
    MICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND
    3× · 2020–2025 · $155k · revenue +231%

Funded once

  • TF
    Together for Progress
    one grant, 2023 · $370k
  • AB
    A BETTER BIG SKYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $260k · revenue +386%
  • PR
    Piedmont Rising Inc
    one grant, 2020 · $175k · revenue -99%
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
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
2
Oklahoma Forward Inc

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…

—
3
Progressive Workers Coalition

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.

—
4
Election Watch Inc

Research analyze publish information to public on elections election systems laws and campaign financing.

Civil Rights
5
Ballot Pa Action

Informed and educated the public and lawmakers about the benefits of including independent voters in Pennsylvania's primary elections.

Civil Rights
6
Elevated Voices Inc

Voter education around policy

—
7
Progress Arizona

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.

Civil Rights
8
Organize for Justice

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.

—
9
Nc for the People Action (formerly Nc Voters for Clean Elections)

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.

Public Benefit
10
Upstate Action Alliance

Non-PartisanVoter Educ Advocacy

Civil Rights
11
Colorado People's Action

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…

—
12
Democracy North Carolina

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.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is For Our Future Action Fund; 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.
04the grantee network

26 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. 26 of the 30 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/26
Grantees still filing
14/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Together for Progress: $370,000 · OtherTogether for ProgressTogether for Progress: $257,500 · OtherTogether for ProgressPiedmont Rising Inc: $175,000 · OtherPiedmont Rising IncMake North Carolina First: $135,000 · OtherMake North Carolina FirstIn Union USA Action: $120,000 · OtherIn Union USA ActionSTRATEGIC VICTORY FUND: $107,500 · OtherSTRATEGIC VICTORY FUNDDefend Washington: $45,000 · Other+3 more: $70,000 · Other+3 morePA ALLIANCE ACTION: $158,000 · Civil RightsPA ALLIANCE ACTIONMICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND: $155,000 · Civil RightsMICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUNDPOWER TO THE POLLS INC: $108,000 · Civil RightsPOWER TO THE POLLS INCARIZONA WINS: $62,500 · Civil RightsARIZONA WINSRURAL ARIZONA ACTION: $50,000 · Civil RightsRURAL ARIZONA ACTIONOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA: $50,000 · Civil RightsOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONAFORWARD ACTION FUND: $25,000 · Civil Rights+3 more: $33,000 · Civil RightsGeorgia Investor Action Fund Inc: $366,500 · Human ServicesGeorgia Investor…NORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND: $28,000 · Human ServicesNORTH CAROLINA A…A BETTER BIG SKY: $260,000 · Community ImprovementA BETTER BI…Alaska Progressive Donor Table: $19,000 · Community ImprovementAlaska Prog…+1 more: $5,000 · Community ImprovementTOGETHER WISCONSIN ACTS INC: $65,000 · HealthJUSTICE FOR NC: $20,000 · EducationFuse Washington: $7,000 · EnvironmentSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $5,000 · EnvironmentCOURAGE CALIFORNIA: $8,000 · Public Benefit
Other$1,280,000Civil Rights$641,500Human Services$394,500Community Improvement$284,000Health$65,000Education$20,000Environment$12,000Public Benefit$8,000

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 budgetGeorgia Investor Action Fund Inc: $366,500 over 3y, 13% of budgetA BETTER BIG SKY: $260,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetPiedmont Rising Inc: $175,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetPA ALLIANCE ACTION: $158,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetMICHIGAN CIVIC ACTION FUND: $155,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetMake North Carolina First: $135,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetIn Union USA Action: $120,000 over 2y, 5.7% of budgetPOWER TO THE POLLS INC: $108,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetSTRATEGIC VICTORY FUND: $107,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTOGETHER WISCONSIN ACTS INC: $65,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetARIZONA WINS: $62,500 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetDefend Washington: $45,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetAlaska Progressive Donor Table: $19,000 over 1y, 7.6% of budgetFuerte Arts Movement: $17,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetONEAMERICA VOTES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCOURAGE CALIFORNIA: $8,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetFuse Washington: $7,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetPROGRESS NOW INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA STANDS UP INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 FundTides AdvocacyAmerica VotesState Engagement FundWay to Win Action Fun…All Hands on Deck Net…Strategic Victory FundOpen Society Action F…Tides FoundationNorth FundDemocracyfirstPro-Democracy Campaign
Sixteen Thirty FundDC43.2× affinity19 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Fuse Washington funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fuse Washington. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%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
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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.

    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 30 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 Fuse Washington’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