Skip to content
Grove Action Fund at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Grove Action Fund

To promote social welfare and effect positive changes in policies related to women's reproductive healthcare, immigrant rights, social safety net services and civic engagement of marginalized communities.

$4.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
34
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$525k
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, FY2018 to 2024.

Public Benefit$11MCivil Rights$10MEnvironment$2.5MPhilanthropy$660kCommunity Improvement$625kEmployment$300kHuman Services$280kCrime & Legal$270kOther$0
02FY2025 · 34 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $70k
  • $50k–250k27 grants · $2.6M
  • $250k+4 grants · $1.6M
$100,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$17M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMERICA VOTES$525,000
CENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION$400,000
NEO PHILANTHROPY ACTION FUND$400,000
TIDES ADVOCACY$265,000
SEMILLA ACTION$210,000
SHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION$175,000
ORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT$170,000
CENTER FOR GOVERNANCE AND INFRASTRUCTURE ACTION INC (MASS LIBERATION ARIZON$150,000
INSTITUTO POWER$125,000
PROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO$125,000
OUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA$125,000
PROGRESSNOW AZ$110,000
THE ORGANIZING ALLIANCE$110,000
FUERTE ARTS MOVEMENT$100,000
ALL IN ACTION FUND$100,000
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 (FY19–25, $1.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 68% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CALIFORNIANS FOR HUMAN IMMIGRANT RIGHTS LEADERSHIP ACTION FUND: $20k → 14%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL INC: $25k → 13%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $100k → 11%GEORGIA CAMPAIGN FOR ADOLESCENT POWER AND POTENTIAL INC: $25k → 13%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $80k → 11%FORWARD TOGETHER ACTION: $140k → 10%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $70k → 11%FORWARD TOGETHER ACTION: $75k → 10%FORWARD TOGETHER ACTION: $75k → 10%WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION: $11k → 17%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $60k → 11%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $100k → 14%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $30k → 11%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $100k → 14%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $100k → 14%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $100k → 14%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $84k → 14%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $70k → 14%NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $68k → 14%NPH ACTION FUND POLITICAL ISSUES COMMITTEE: $150k → 10%NPH ACTION FUND POLITICAL ISSUES COMMITTEE: $60k → 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

NH
WA
IL
WI
NY
OR
NV
OH
CA
MD
AZ
NM
NC
DC
LA
AL
GA
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$27M · 59 repeat orgs$2.6M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +55% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

59 repeat relationships: 30 still active in FY2025, 29 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

59
35

Total granted

$27M
$2.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%
0%

Still filing today

90%
51%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $480k 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
Civil RightsCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesPublic BenefitEnvironmentInternationalOther
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

  • AV
    America Votes
    8× · 2018–2025 · $4.1M · revenue +495%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION
    8× · 2018–2025 · $1.7M · revenue ×17 · 81% of their budget
  • TA
    TIDES ADVOCACY
    7× · 2018–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +130%

Funded once

  • CG
    CANDIDE GROUP LLC
    one grant, 2022 · $375k
  • SM
    SUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND
    one grant, 2021 · $350k · revenue -75%
  • NC
    Nevada Conservation League
    one grant, 2022 · $140k · revenue -56%
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
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…

—
2
Six Action

Six action realizes a bold policy agenda that secures and sustains meaningful racial, gender, social and economic justice outcomes that center the people most impacted by systemic and structural oppression. we support values-aligned state…

Civil Rights
3
Climate Equity Action Fund

The climate equity action fund (ceaf) works hand-in-hand with community-based partners in critical states across the country to secure and sustain policy wins for climate and clean energy. building on over a decade of trust with leading…

Environment
4
Powerswitch Action

Powerswitch action is a national network forging collective democracy and economies in our cities and states, together with our 21 grassroots affiliates.

Community Improvement
5
Nmvc Action Fund

NMVC Action Fund engages in lobbying activities in support of New Mexicos children and families and it participates in electoral activities.

Youth Development
6
Our Voice Nuestra Voz

Our Voice Nuestra Voice is a nation-building organization, anchoring ancestry while building Black and Brown solidarity in New Orleans. We remember our shared culture and language, reconnect to the land, and organize our community around…

Human Services
7
Right to Democracy Action

Advance democracy, equity, and self-determination in u.s. territories, including by promoting civic engagement among the territorial diaspora throughout the united states.

—
8
American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona

The american civil liberties union of arizona is the state's premier guardian of liberty working through the arizona legislature and communities statewide to defend and preserve individual rights and freedoms guaranteed to all by the…

—
9
La Voice Action

La voice action's mission is to build multi-racial, interfaith power to win policies that transforms los angeles into a county that reflects the human dignity of all people, with racial equity and abundance for all.

Civil Rights
10
Missouri Jobs With Justice Voter Action

To develop and advocate for legislation, regulations, ballot initiatives, and government programs as a voice of the working class, to promote social justice, and to stimulate the economy; and, to conduct research, educate the public, and…

Civil Rights
11
Act for America

Advocacy concerning democratic values, national security and defense; lobbying of government officials in favor of policies that further the defense of the u.s. and its constitution; development of coalitions with other organizations to…

Civil Rights
12
Yes On National Popular Vote

Support "yes" vote on referendum dealing with national popular vote

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Somos Accion; the most unlike its peers is Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights. 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

84 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. 84 of the 102 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.

14
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
30
Early backer (in before they grew)
78/84
Grantees still filing
47/84
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ARIZONA WINS: $2,240,000 · Civil RightsARIZONA WINSCENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION: $1,700,000 · Civil RightsCENTER FOR CIVIC ACTIONNEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc: $1,260,000 · Civil RightsNEO Philanthropy Action Fund IncPROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO: $615,000 · Civil RightsPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA ACTION: $580,000 · Civil RightsADRC ACTION: $575,000 · Civil RightsMI FAMILIA VOTA: $550,000 · Civil RightsOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA: $535,000 · Civil RightsFORWARD ACTION FUND: $515,000 · Civil RightsTHE ORGANIZING ALLIANCE: $470,000 · Civil RightsPROGRESS ARIZONA: $390,000 · Civil Rights+17 more: $2,211,500 · Civil Rights+17 moreTIDES ADVOCACY: $1,375,000 · OtherTIDES ADVOCACYBETTER FUTURE FOR NEW MEXICO: $840,000 · OtherBETTER FUTURE FOR NEW MEXICONM NATIVE VOTE: $430,000 · OtherNM NATIVE VOTECANDIDE GROUP LLC: $375,000 · OtherSUNRISE MOVEMENT: $350,000 · OtherNEVADA ALLIANCE: $305,000 · OtherPROTECT DEMOCRACY UNITED: $300,000 · OtherCONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO: $300,000 · OtherUNITE HERE ACTION FUND: $300,000 · OtherWOMENS FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA INC: $290,000 · OtherBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc: $288,500 · OtherUNITED WE DREAM ACTION: $270,000 · Other+36 more: $2,478,500 · Other+36 moreAmerica Votes: $4,105,000 · Community ImprovementAmerica VotesORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT: $545,000 · Community ImprovementORGANIZERS IN THE LAND …BATTLE BORN PROGRESS: $510,000 · Community ImprovementBATTLE BORN PROGRESSSHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION: $415,000 · Community ImprovementSHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY …WORKER POWER: $265,000 · Community Improvement+3 more: $375,000 · Community Improvement+3 moreInstituto Power: $497,000 · Public BenefitNEW LEFT ACCELERATOR: $490,000 · Public BenefitNORTH FUND: $225,000 · Public BenefitCOMMON DEFENSE CIVIC ENGAGEMENT INC: $200,000 · Public BenefitCIVIC EMPOWERMENT COALITION: $170,000 · Public Benefit+2 more: $85,000 · Public BenefitNILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $621,500 · Human ServicesLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $340,000 · Human ServicesFORWARD TOGETHER ACTION: $290,000 · Human ServicesNPH Action Fund: $210,000 · Human Services+3 more: $81,000 · Human ServicesSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $400,000 · EnvironmentSUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND: $350,000 · Environment+1 more: $25,000 · EnvironmentONE APIA NEVADA: $675,000 · International
Civil Rights$11,641,500Other$7,902,000Community Improvement$6,215,000Public Benefit$1,667,000Human Services$1,542,500Environment$775,000International$675,000

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 budgetAmerica Votes: $4,105,000 over 8y, 2.0% of budgetARIZONA WINS: $2,240,000 over 6y, 22% of budgetCENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION: $1,700,000 over 8y, 81% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY: $1,375,000 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc: $1,260,000 over 8y, 1.7% of budgetONE APIA NEVADA: $675,000 over 6y, 27% of budgetNILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND: $621,500 over 7y, 17% of budgetPROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO: $615,000 over 8y, 42% of budgetPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA ACTION: $580,000 over 4y, 9.6% of budgetADRC ACTION: $575,000 over 2y, 8.3% of budgetMI FAMILIA VOTA: $550,000 over 5y, 16% of budgetORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT: $545,000 over 7y, 8.6% of budgetOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA: $535,000 over 6y, 9.7% of budgetFORWARD ACTION FUND: $515,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetBATTLE BORN PROGRESS: $510,000 over 6y, 22% of budgetInstituto Power: $497,000 over 7y, 18% of budgetNEW LEFT ACCELERATOR: $490,000 over 6y, 9.4% of budgetTHE ORGANIZING ALLIANCE: $470,000 over 5y, 77% of budgetNM NATIVE VOTE: $430,000 over 7y, 97% of budgetSHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION: $415,000 over 6y, 9.2% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $400,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetPROGRESS ARIZONA: $390,000 over 4y, 16% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $355,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetSUNRISE MOVEMENT: $350,000 over 2y, 5.2% of budgetSUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND: $350,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $340,000 over 5y, 3.5% of budgetNEVADA ALLIANCE: $305,000 over 8y, 20% of budgetPROTECT DEMOCRACY UNITED: $300,000 over 4y, 9.8% of budgetCONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO: $300,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetUNITE HERE ACTION FUND: $300,000 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetWOMENS FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA INC: $290,000 over 5y, 14% of budgetFORWARD TOGETHER ACTION: $290,000 over 3y, 18% of budgetBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc: $288,500 over 5y, 2.0% of budgetUNITED WE DREAM ACTION: $270,000 over 5y, 5.7% of budgetWORKER POWER: $265,000 over 4y, 8.1% of budgetSIERRA CLUB: $245,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetRURAL ARIZONA ACTION: $240,000 over 4y, 9.4% of budgetNORTH FUND: $225,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetSOMOS ACCION: $210,000 over 5y, 40% of budgetSEMILLA ACTION: $210,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetNPH Action Fund: $210,000 over 2y, 6.5% of budgetCOMMON DEFENSE CIVIC ENGAGEMENT INC: $200,000 over 4y, 9.9% of budgetGroundswell Action Fund: $195,000 over 3y, 4.4% of budgetFuerte Arts Movement: $180,000 over 4y, 17% of budgetBALLOT INITIATIVE STRATEGY CENTER INC: $177,500 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetBLACK WOMEN FOR WELLNESS ACTION PROJECT: $175,000 over 5y, 34% of budgetEDUCATEUS: $175,000 over 3y, 26% of budgetCIVIC EMPOWERMENT COALITION: $170,000 over 3y, 100% 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.

  • Who funds America Votes ↗
  • Who funds ARIZONA WINS ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR CIVIC ACTION ↗
  • Who funds TIDES ADVOCACY ↗
  • Who funds NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc ↗
  • Who funds ONE APIA NEVADA ↗
  • Who funds NILC IMMIGRANT JUSTICE FUND ↗
  • Who funds PROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO ↗
  • Who funds PROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA ACTION ↗
  • Who funds ADRC ACTION ↗
  • Who funds MI FAMILIA VOTA ↗
  • Who funds ORGANIZERS IN THE LAND OF ENCHANTMENT ↗
  • Who funds OUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA ↗
  • Who funds FORWARD ACTION FUND ↗
  • Who funds BATTLE BORN PROGRESS ↗
  • Who funds Instituto Power ↗
  • Who funds NEW LEFT ACCELERATOR ↗
  • Who funds THE ORGANIZING ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds NM NATIVE VOTE ↗
  • Who funds SHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION ↗
  • Who funds SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND ↗
  • Who funds PROGRESS ARIZONA ↗
  • Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds SUNRISE MOVEMENT ↗
  • Who funds SUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA ↗
  • Who funds NEVADA ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds PROTECT DEMOCRACY UNITED ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVATION VOTERS NEW MEXICO ↗
  • Who funds UNITE HERE ACTION FUND ↗
  • Who funds WOMENS FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA INC ↗
  • Who funds FORWARD TOGETHER ACTION ↗
  • Who funds Black Voters Matter Fund Inc ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WE DREAM ACTION ↗
  • Who funds WORKER POWER ↗
  • Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
  • Who funds RURAL ARIZONA ACTION ↗
  • Who funds NORTH FUND ↗

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 AdvocacyWay to Win Action Fun…Open Society Action F…All Hands on Deck Net…Women Donors Network …America VotesNorth FundNEO Philanthropy Acti…Democracy Fund Voice …State Engagement FundTides Foundation
Sixteen Thirty FundDC91.2× affinity47 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Tides Advocacy · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Women Donors Network Action · America Votes · North Fund · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Democracy Fund Voice Inc · State Engagement Fund · Tides 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 Grove Action Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Grove Action Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 102 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 Grove Action’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