Skip to content
Giffords at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Giffords

To address the issue of gun violence in communities across the country.

$402k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
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, FY2019 to 2024.

Public Benefit$364kScience & Tech$156kCivil Rights$141kCrime & Legal$117kCommunity Improvement$100kEmployment$40kEducation$20kEnvironment$16kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $310,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $401,501 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $91,501 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $110k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $200k
$20,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$6.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SENATE MAJORITY PAC$100,000
ARIZONA DEMOCRATIC PARTY$100,000
UNRIG OUR ECONOMY$40,000
EDUCATION REFORM NOW ADVOCACY$20,000
END GUN VIOLENCE MICHIGAN ACTION$20,000
TEXAS GUN SENSE$10,000
HISPANIC FEDERATION$10,000
TIDES CENTER$10,000
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 (FY24–24, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%TIDES CENTER: $10k → 10%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

IL
WI
MI
NY
OR
PA
CA
UT
CO
DE
AZ
NM
DC
TX
FL
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.

22%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$217k · 5 repeat orgs$757k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
13

Total granted

$217k
$477k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+58%

Still filing today

80%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $280k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsCrime & LegalEducationHealthOther
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

  • LV
    LATINO VICTORY PROJECT
    2× · 2019–2024 · $85k · revenue +50%
  • CP
    CEASEFIRE PENNSYLVANIA
    2× · 2020–2022 · $20k · revenue +163%
  • TG
    Texas Gun Sense
    2× · 2023–2024 · $16k · revenue +31%

Funded once

  • ST
    SMART TECH CHALLENGES FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $156k · revenue +882%
  • SS
    SAFE SCHOOLS SAFE COMMUNITIES OREGON
    one grant, 2022 · $105k
  • TG
    The Good Land Committee Inc
    one grant, 2020 · $100k
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
Latino Political Network
—
2
Legal Community Against Violence dba Law Cntr to Prevent Gun Violence

Law center to prevent gun violence is a national law center focused on providing comprehensive legal expertise in support of gun violence prevention.

—
3
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence

The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence seeks to secure freedom from gun violence through research, strategic engagement, and effective policy advocacy.

—
4
Violence Policy Center

Educational, research activity on firearms violence.

Crime & Legal
5
Global Action On Gun Violence Inc

GAGV is committed to ending the global gun violence crisis by working with and for the international community through litigation, human rights, education and advocacy, with a focus on reforming dangerous gun industry practices that…

Civil Rights
6
Alliance for Gun Responsibility

To advocate for solutions that reduce gun violence.

Public Safety & Disaster
7
Gun Violence Intervention Coordination Center

The gvicc identifies, coordinates and strengthens gun violence intervention programs and outcomes in philadelphia by bridging efforts spanning city government, community-based organizations, local health systems, and civic and…

Public Safety & Disaster
8
Gunsdown Inc

Guns down focuses on reducing the number of guns in circulation to minimize gun violence

Civil Rights
9
BlackPush Inc

Our organization combats gun violence works to turn out the vote pushes for laws to help previously incarcerated and issues related to social injustice.

Religion
10
One Aim Illinois

The One Aim Illinois Gun Violence Prevention Coalition stands firm in our commitment to advocating for measures that put survivors first, protect vulnerable communities, and create a future free from the threat of gun violence.

Education
11
Center for Gun Rights and Responsibility

Gun safety education

—
12
Oregon Alliance to Prevent Gun Violence

Alliance for a Safe Oregon works to make Oregon safer for all Oregonians by ending gun tragedies in our communities. We work with experts, civic leaders and community volunteers to create and advocate for policies, programs and education…

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Latino Victory Project; the most unlike its peers is The Terrell Bosley Anti-Violence. 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

15 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. 15 of the 24 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/15
Grantees still filing
7/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SMART TECH CHALLENGES FOUNDATION: $156,000 · OtherSMART TECH CHALLENGES FOUNDATIONSAFE SCHOOLS SAFE COMMUNITIES OREGON: $105,000 · OtherSAFE SCHOOLS SAFE COMMUNITIES OREGONARIZONA DEMOCRATIC PARTY: $100,000 · OtherARIZONA DEMOCRATIC PARTYSMP: $100,000 · OtherSMPThe Good Land Committee Inc: $100,000 · OtherThe Good Land Committee IncLATINO VICTORY PROJECT: $85,000 · OtherLATINO VICTORY PROJECTUNRIG OUR ECONOMY INC: $40,000 · Other+7 more: $80,000 · Other+7 moreGUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION ACTION COMMITTEE: $80,000 · Crime & LegalGUN VIOLENCE…MAJOR CITIES CHIEFS ASSOCIATION: $25,000 · Crime & LegalMAJOR CITIES…THE TERRELL BOSLEY ANTI-VIOLENCE: $6,000 · Crime & LegalTHE TERRELL …CEASEFIRE PENNSYLVANIA: $20,000 · Civil RightsEND GUN VIOLENCE MICHIGAN: $20,000 · Civil RightsTexas Gun Sense: $16,000 · Civil RightsALIANZA CENTER INC: $5,500 · Civil RightsEDUCATION REFORM NOW ADVOCACY INC: $20,000 · EducationEMBOLDEN WI INC: $15,000 · HealthTIDES CENTER: $10,000 · Human Services
Other$766,000Crime & Legal$111,000Civil Rights$61,500Education$20,000Health$15,000Human Services$10,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetThe Good Land Committee Inc: $100,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetLATINO VICTORY PROJECT: $85,000 over 2y, 5.5% of budgetGUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION ACTION COMMITTEE: $80,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetUNRIG OUR ECONOMY INC: $40,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMAJOR CITIES CHIEFS ASSOCIATION: $25,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetCEASEFIRE PENNSYLVANIA: $20,000 over 2y, 7.5% of budgetEND GUN VIOLENCE MICHIGAN: $20,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetEDUCATION REFORM NOW ADVOCACY INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTexas Gun Sense: $16,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetEMBOLDEN WI INC: $15,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCONGRESSIONAL HISPANIC CAUCUS INSTITUTE INC: $8,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE TERRELL BOSLEY ANTI-VIOLENCE: $6,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetALIANZA CENTER INC: $5,500 over 1y, 0.5% 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 FundEverytown for Gun Saf…Education Reform Now …New Venture FundFidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Sixteen Thirty FundDC23.3× affinity9 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund Inc · Education Reform Now Advocacy Inc · New Venture Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Alianza Center Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get 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
⤢ 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.

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 24 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 Giffords’ 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