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

· Public charity

Grassroots Global Justice

Support low income grassroots communities to participate in grassroots global economic development through community leadership, cultural development, instruction and training.

$100k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$10k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Environment$1.9MCivil Rights$1.3MCommunity Improvement$605kPhilanthropy$86kFood & Nutrition$40kInternational$36kArts & Culture$29kEducation$13k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $10,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $100,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $90,000 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.
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$6.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CENTER FOR THIRD WORLD ORGANIZING$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 (FY19–19, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%TIDES CENTER FBO PODER: $10k → 10%MUJERES UNIDAS Y ACTIVAS: $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

MN
NY
MA
OR
SD
CA
NC
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.7M · 6 repeat orgs$224k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
13

Total granted

$3.7M
$214k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-5%
+63%

Still filing today

83%
92%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Community ImprovementEnvironmentEducationInternationalCivil RightsHealthOther
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

  • IE
    INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK
    6× · 2019–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +51%
  • RIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE
    6× · 2019–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +150%
  • CJ
    CLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE
    3× · 2022–2024 · $778k · revenue -5%

Funded once

  • UT
    Urban Tilthgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $40k · revenue +697%
  • GI
    GRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $21k · revenue +233%
  • CHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $21k · revenue +236%
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
California Environmental Justice Alliance

Our mission is to fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…

Environment
2
Common Future

Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…

Community Improvement
3
Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy

CAUSE's mission is to build grassroots power to realize social, economic and environmental justice for the people of the Central Coast Region through policy research, leadership development, organizing and advocacy.

Community Improvement
4
Jobs with Justice San Francisco

A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…

Employment
5
Taproot Earth

Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.

Environment
6
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
7
California Donor Table

California Donor Table anchors a hub of donors, foundations, and community leaders. We pool together our resources to shape California into a truly democratic state that works for the people, not the powerful. Rooted in our commitment to…

Civil Rights
8
Central California Environmental Justice Network

To uplift low-income communities of color in the San Joaquin Valley by ensuring access to clean air, water, land, and food sovereignty.

Environment
9
Chicago United for Equity

Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.

Civil Rights
10
Center On Race Poverty & the Environment

CRPE is a national environmental justice organization providing legal, organizing, and technical assistance to grassroots groups in low-income communities and communities of color.

Crime & Legal
11
Amazon Watch Inc

To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…

Environment
12
Transformca dba Transform

Transform works to ensure that people of all incomes thrive in a world safe from climate chaos.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Right to the City Alliance; the most unlike its peers is Indigenous Environmental Network. 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

21 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. 21 of the 23 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
11/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $1,128,171 · EducationINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORKSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $75,746 · EducationSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC+1 more: $12,500 · EducationRIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE: $1,101,529 · Civil RightsRIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCECLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE: $778,052 · EnvironmentCLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANC…Urban Tilth: $40,000 · Environment+2 more: $20,000 · EnvironmentMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER: $357,320 · Community ImprovementMOVEMENT STRATEGY…Struggle for Miamis Affordable and Sustainable Housing Incorporated: $192,454 · Community ImprovementStruggle for Miam…+3 more: $55,000 · Community Improvement+3 moreBLACK WORKERS FOR JUSTICE: $110,000 · OtherAFRORESISTANCE INC: $15,000 · OtherLAKOTA WELLNESS SOCIETY INC: $9,000 · OtherBOREALIS PHILANTHROPY: $20,000 · OtherMujeres Unidas y Activas: $10,000 · OtherTIDES CENTER: $10,000 · OtherEDGE FUNDERS ALLIANCE: $10,000 · OtherGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC: $21,200 · InternationalCenter for Third World Organizing: $10,000 · InternationalCHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION: $21,000 · Health
Education$1,216,417Civil Rights$1,101,529Environment$838,052Community Improvement$604,774Other$184,000International$31,200Health$21,000

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 budgetINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $1,128,171 over 6y, 9.9% of budgetRIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE: $1,101,529 over 6y, 2.7% of budgetCLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE: $778,052 over 3y, 5.7% of budgetMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER: $357,320 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetStruggle for Miamis Affordable and Sustainable Housing Incorporated: $192,454 over 2y, 22% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $75,746 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUrban Tilth: $40,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC: $21,200 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION: $21,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCOMMON COUNSEL FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WORKING WORLD INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBOREALIS PHILANTHROPY: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOPAL: $15,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetOCCIDENTAL COLLEGE: $12,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITIES FOR A BETTER ENVIRONMENT: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetEDGE FUNDERS ALLIANCE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetMujeres Unidas y Activas: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAsian Pacific Environmental Network: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $10,000 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.

ImpactassetsincAmalgamated Charitabl…Flock IncMovement Strategy Cen…Solutions Project IncTides FoundationThe Schmidt Family Fo…Rsf Social Finance IncClimate Justice Allia…Willow Redistribution…The Libra FoundationSolidago Foundation
ImpactassetsincMD21.6× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Impactassetsinc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Flock Inc · Movement Strategy Center · Solutions Project Inc · Tides Foundation · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Climate Justice Alliance · Willow Redistribution Foundation · The Libra Foundation · Solidago 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 Grassroots Global Justice funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Grassroots Global Justice. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 20%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Grassroots Global Justice?

    Find your warmest path to Grassroots Global Justice 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 23 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 Grassroots Global Justice’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