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

· Public charity

Indivisible Project

INDIVISIBLE PROJECT's mission is to cultivate and lift up a grassroots movement of local groups to defeat the trump agenda, elect progressive leaders, and realize bold progressive policies.

$1.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$1.5M
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.

Civil Rights$5.5MPublic Benefit$1.2MHealth$45kCommunity Improvement$35kCrime & Legal$25kPhilanthropy$25k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,500,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INDIVISIBLE ACTION$1,500,000
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 (FY18–19, $90k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 72% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA (LUCHA): $25k → 11%TIDES CENTER: $25k → 10%NATIONAL COUNCIL ON INDEPENDENT LIVING: $25k → 14%NATIONAL PARTNERSHIP FOR NEW AMERICANS INC: $5k → 14%NATIONAL COUNCIL ON INDEPENDENT LIVING: $10k → 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

IL
CA
WV
AZ
DC
GA
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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.4M · 5 repeat orgs$1.3M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +142% since the first grant, against +36% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
21

Total granted

$5.4M
$1.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+142%
+36%

Still filing today

80%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsPublic BenefitHuman ServicesHealthCommunity ImprovementEducationOther
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

  • IA
    INDIVISIBLE ACTION
    6× · 2018–2024 · $5.3M
  • THE PRAXIS PROJECT INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $35k · revenue +388%
  • NC
    NATIONAL COUNCIL ON INDEPENDENT LIVING
    2× · 2018–2019 · $35k · revenue -14%

Funded once

  • IC
    INDIVISIBLE CIVICS
    one grant, 2018 · $943k · revenue -1%
  • UA
    UN-PAC ACTION
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue -100%
  • CP
    CONGRESSIONAL PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $50k · revenue +36%
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
Power Coalition for Electoral Justice

We created the power coalition for electoral justice with our partners because this is a moment of opportunity; a time to dig in and become internationally strategic; in short, to use this movement to create a true paradigm shift. to plant…

Civil Rights
3
Progressive Change Institute

The progressive change institute develops and promotes public policy, fosters bottom-up democracy, and educates the public. this includes working to impact the mainstream political discourse and protect democracy.

Public Benefit
4
Arizona Wins

Az wins is a coalition of organizations dedicated to achieving public policies that benefit working arizona families and advancing an inclusive, engaged, just and equitable state for all arizonans. in 2024 az wins substantially reduced its…

Civil Rights
5
Bold Impact

Bold Impact is a national nonprofit dedicated to supporting a democracy where all communities get to thrive.

Arts & Culture
6
Progress Texas Institute

The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.

Civil Rights
7
Chicago Votes

Chicago Votes is a non-partisan, non-profit organization building a more inclusive democracy by putting power in the hands of young Chicagoans. We're engaging and developing a new generation of leaders by opening the doors of government,…

Civil Rights
8
The Campaign Legal Center Inc

The nonpartisan campaign legal center advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every american's rights to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic…

Crime & Legal
9
Coalition for Dc Representation in Congress Education Fund

Founded in 1998, dc vote is a national citizen engagement and advocacy organization dedicated to strengthening democracy and securing equality for all in the district of columbia.

Education
10
Center for Popular Democracy Inc

The center for popular democracy (cpd) and its affiliates know that everyday people have the power to change the world. we upend business and politics as usual to forge a representative, multiracial government and society where we all…

Public Benefit
11
Democracy Works Inc

The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.

Civil Rights
12
Right to Democracy Project

Advance democracy, equity, and self-determination in U.S. territories through participatory advocacy, narrative and cultural change, and ecosystem building.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tides Advocacy; the most unlike its peers is Tomorrow We Vote Action. 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

25 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. 25 of the 28 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/25
Grantees still filing
13/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INDIVISIBLE ACTION: $5,291,163 · OtherINDIVISIBLE ACTION+9 more: $184,500 · OtherINDIVISIBLE CIVICS: $942,920 · Civil RightsINDIVISIBLE CIVIC…+6 more: $105,000 · Civil Rights+6 moreNATIONAL COUNCIL ON INDEPENDENT LIVING: $35,000 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTER: $25,000 · Human ServicesLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $25,000 · Human ServicesNATIONAL PARTNERSHIP FOR NEW AMERICANS: $5,000 · Human ServicesCONGRESSIONAL PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS CENTER: $50,000 · Public BenefitCivic Engagement Beyond Voting: $6,500 · Public BenefitCATALYST CALIFORNIA: $5,000 · Public BenefitTHE PRAXIS PROJECT INC: $35,000 · HealthMIJENTE: $35,000 · Community ImprovementTIDES FOUNDATION: $25,000 · PhilanthropyFAIR FIGHT ACTION INC: $20,000 · Education
Other$5,475,663Civil Rights$1,047,920Human Services$90,000Public Benefit$61,500Health$35,000Community Improvement$35,000Philanthropy$25,000Education$20,000

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 budgetINDIVISIBLE CIVICS: $942,920 over 1y, 18% of budgetUN-PAC ACTION: $50,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetFor West Virginia's Future Inc: $40,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTHE PRAXIS PROJECT INC: $35,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetNATIONAL COUNCIL ON INDEPENDENT LIVING: $35,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetMIJENTE: $35,000 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetEQUALITY ALLIANCE OF SAN DIEGO: $30,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $25,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetPROGRESSIVE CAUCUS ACTION FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetFLORIDA RISING TOGETHER INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPROGRESS ARIZONA: $25,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetFAIR FIGHT ACTION INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTake Back The Court Action Fund: $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCONGRESSIONAL HISPANIC CAUCUS INSTITUTE INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCivic Engagement Beyond Voting: $6,500 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARTNERSHIP FOR NEW AMERICANS: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ACTION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCATALYST CALIFORNIA: $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.

Tides FoundationAll Hands on Deck Net…Sixteen Thirty FundWomen Donors Network …Way to Win Action Fun…Open Society Action F…Tides AdvocacyNorth FundOur American Future A…America VotesWellness Advocacy FundPublic Wise Inc
Tides FoundationCA25.3× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Women Donors Network Action · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Tides Advocacy · North Fund · Our American Future Action · America Votes · Wellness Advocacy Fund · Public Wise 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 Indivisible Project funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Indivisible Project. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 28 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 Indivisible Project’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