Skip to content
Indiana Progressive Collaborative Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Indiana Progressive Collaborative Inc

The promotion of a healthy democracy through research, engagement and education of the citizens of indiana about the positions of public officials, legislative bills, and proposed legislative action on issues related to a healthy democracy, education, the environment, economic justice, and human rights.

$130k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$92k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2024.

Public Benefit$271kHealth$45kCivil Rights$21kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $122,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $129,500 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $7,500 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 · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $92k
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INDIANA CONSERVATION FUND$92,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES OF INDIANA$15,000
MAD VOTERS$15,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 95% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%THE GOOD TROUBLE COALITION: $25k → 5%MAD VOTERS: $15k → 12%MAD VOTERS: $30k → 15%INDIANA VOTES (AKA ACT INDIANA INC: $100k → 16%HOOSIER ACTION: $30k → 18%INDIANA TASK FORCE: $16k → 19%FAITH IN PLACE ACTION FUND: $15k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES OF INDIANA: $15k → 12%INDIANA VOTES (AKA ACT INDIANA INC): $25k → 16%AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION LLC: $21k → 16%IMAN ADVOCATES INC: $30k → 16%INDIANA MUSLIM ADVOCACY NETWORK: $25k → 16%INDIANA CONSERVATION FUND: $92k → 16%PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES OF INDIANA: $20k → 16%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.
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.

40%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$205k · 3 repeat orgs$304k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
8

Total granted

$205k
$212k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-69%
+23%

Still filing today

0%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 25% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $92k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
Public BenefitEnvironmentHealthCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • AI
    Act Indiana -
    2× · 2022–2023 · $125k · revenue -88%
  • MI
    MADVOTERS INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $45k
  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES OF INDIANA AND KENTUCKY INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $35k · revenue -69%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $50k
  • IA
    IMAN Advocates Inc
    one grant, 2024 · $30k
  • HA
    HOOSIER ACTION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $30k · revenue +81%
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
Indiana Democracy Collective Inc

We are building a diverse community of donors dedicated to investing in the long-term political and civic infrastructure needed to lift up all Hoosiers. Vision: An Indiana that is a healthy, just place to live in an economy and a democracy…

Civil Rights
2
Indiana Legal Foundation

Public Interest Legal Organization

—
3
Faith in Indiana

Faith in Indiana (formerly IndyCAN) is a catalyst for faith communities and marginalized peoples to act collectively for racial and economic justice in Indiana. FaithIN develops civic leaders directly impacted by inequality, awakens the…

Human Services
4
Indiana Conservation Voters

Icv ensures indiana's elected officials are accountable to hoosiers who all deserve clean energy, clean water and clean air.

—
5
Muslim Alliance of Indiana Inc

Our mission is to inspire Muslim Hoosiers to connect through service and civic engagements in their communities. Our vision is to see Muslim Hoosiers actively involved in their community, helping to build a diverse and vibrant state…

Civil Rights
6
Citizens Action Coalition Inc

To initiate & coordinate citizens action directed to improving the quality of life of all inhabitants of the state of indiana through principled advocacy of public policies to preserve democracy, conserve natural resources, and to protect…

—
7
Indiana Justice Project Inc

The indiana justice project is a non-partisan, non-profit legal advocacy organization. we use all available legal tools to ensure equal justice and opportunity for all hoosiers. we focus on health, housing, and food insecurity.

Crime & Legal
8
Citizens Action Coalition Education Fund Inc

Mission is to perform research, public education and development efforts to improve the quality of life for residents of indiana.

Public Benefit
9
Indiana Progressive Collaborative Inc

The promotion of a healthy democracy through research, engagement and education of the citizens of indiana about the positions of public officials, legislative bills, and proposed legislative action on issues related to a healthy…

Civil Rights
10
Indiana Town Halls

Policy and Political Awareness

—
11
Count Us in Inc

Count us in is the first indiana based 501(c)(3) non-partisan non-profit and movement whose mission is to uplift the voice of citizens and fosters more inclusive and equitable political participation by encouraging a larger, more diverse…

Civil Rights
12
Stand Up Indiana Inc

To uplift voices of hoosiers across the state and support them in the fight for a better indiana. we strive to be the communications hub for the activists who need it most, providing communities with the tools they need to organize for a…

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Indiana Conservation Fund Inc; the most unlike its peers is Iman Advocates Inc. 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

9 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. 9 of the 12 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Act Indiana -: $125,000 · Public BenefitAct Indiana -IMAN Advocates Inc: $30,000 · Public BenefitIMAN Advocates IncIndiana Muslim Advocacy Network LLC: $25,000 · Public BenefitIndiana Muslim Advocacy Network LLCIndividual grant recipient: $50,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMADVOTERS INC: $45,000 · OtherMADVOTERS INCPLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES OF INDIANA AND KENTUCKY INC: $35,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES OF INDIA…INDIANA CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF INDIANA INC: $21,000 · OtherINDIANA CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF INDI…INDIANA TASK FORCE INC: $16,000 · OtherINDIANA TASK FORCE INCINDIANA CONSERVATION FUND INC: $92,000 · EnvironmentINDIANA CONSERVATION FU…FAITH IN PLACE ACTION FUND: $15,000 · EnvironmentFAITH IN PLACE ACTION F…HOOSIER ACTION INC: $30,000 · Community ImprovementGood Trouble Coalition Indiana Inc: $25,000 · Health
Public Benefit$180,000Other$167,000Environment$107,000Community Improvement$30,000Health$25,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetIMAN Advocates Inc: $30,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetHOOSIER ACTION INC: $30,000 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetIndiana Muslim Advocacy Network LLC: $25,000 over 1y, 84% of budgetGood Trouble Coalition Indiana Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 91% of budgetINDIANA CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF INDIANA INC: $21,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetFAITH IN PLACE ACTION FUND: $15,000 over 1y, 4.6% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Indiana Democracy Col…
Indiana Democracy Collective IncIN17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Indiana Democracy Collective Inc

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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, FY20–25
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Indiana Progressive Collaborative Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Indiana Progressive Collaborative Inc 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 12 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 Indiana Progressive Collaborative’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