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

· Public charity

Innovation Law Lab

Innovation Law Lab seeks to build permanent pathways to immigrant inclusion by designing, implementing and evaluating highly effective and scalable systems of care that address immigrant deportations and civic exclusions on account of immigration status.

$60k
Granted FY2023
1
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$60k
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, FY2019 to 2023.

Crime & Legal$1.1MHuman Services$826kCivil Rights$364kInternational$45k
02FY2023 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$60,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$7.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Sante Fe Dreamers Project$60,000
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 (FY20–22, $789k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 64% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Team Brownsville: $45k → 10%Lutheran Community Services NW: $119k → 9%Lutheran Community Services NW: $114k → 9%Lutheran Community Services NW: $8k → 9%ICS: $89k → 12%ICS: $30k → 12%ICS: $17k → 12%Pueblo Unido PDX: $168k → 12%Pueblo Unido PDX: $114k → 12%Pueblo Unido PDX: $86k → 12%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.2M · 8 repeat orgs$135k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +82% since the first grant, against +76% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
3

Total granted

$2.2M
$135k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+82%
+76%

Still filing today

75%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23
Human ServicesCrime & LegalOther
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

  • PU
    Pueblo Unido PDX
    3× · 2020–2022 · $368k · revenue +100%
  • MP
    METROPOLITAN PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICES INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $294k · revenue +82%
  • LC
    Lutheran Community Services Northwest
    3× · 2020–2022 · $240k · revenue +78%

Funded once

  • SP
    SAFE PASSAGE PROJECT CORPORATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $45k · revenue +76%
  • MM
    Montefoire Medical Center
    one grant, 2021 · $45k
  • TI
    Teambrownsville Inc
    one grant, 2021 · $45k · revenue -83%
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
Southern California Immigration Project

Southern California Immigration Project is a public interest nonprofit organization dedicated to providing pro bono legal services to survivors of human and civil rights violations.

International
2
Immigrant Connection

Ensuring greater access to high-quality low-cost immigration legal services across the United States through local immigrant connection sites across the country. Our sites based in both rural and urban areas are established in…

Human Services
3
Immigrant Defenders Law Center

Immigrant Defenders Law Center (ImmDef) is a next-generation social justice law firm that defends our immigrant communities against injustices in the immigration system.

Crime & Legal
4
Colectiva Legal Del Pueblo

Colectiva Legal del Pueblo is a non-hierarchal collective organization founded for and by undocumented immigrants working to build community leadership and power for migrant justice through legal services, advocacy and education.

Civil Rights
5
Greater Portland Immigrant Welcome Center

The Greater Portland Immigrant Welcome Center serves as a hub of collaboration that strengthens the immigrant community through language acquisition, economic integration and civic engagement.

Human Services
6
Immigration Services and Legal Advocacy

Immigration Legal Services and Advocacy (ISLA) provides direct representation to indigent detained immigrants throughout Louisiana on a pro bono basis and under a universal representation model. ISLA provides information to the public to…

Crime & Legal
7
Carolina Immigration Law

Provides immigration legal services to persons who are otherwise financially incapable of obtaining such services.

Crime & Legal
8
Refugee & Immigrant Center for Education & Legal Services

To deliver legal and social services to people and families who want to put down roots in the u.s. and cultivate welcoming communities that uphold our collective freedoms.

Civil Rights
9
Apoyo Legal Migrante Asociado

Serve immigrants, especially immigrant victims of crime.

Crime & Legal
10
Northwest Immigrant Rights Project

Northwest immigrant rights project (nwirp) is a nonprofit organization committed to defending and advancing the rights of immigrants through immigration legal services to persons of low income, and also by providing community education and…

—
11
Santa Barbara County Immigrant Legal Defense Center

To provide equal access to justice and due process to indigent immigrants facing removal proceedings.

Crime & Legal
12
Texas Immigration Law Council

It is the mission of the Texas Immigration Law Council to protect and promote the basic rights of immigrants and refugees of all nationalities within Texas.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Safe Passage Project Corporation; the most unlike its peers is Teambrownsville 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

8 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. 8 of the 11 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $389,153 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIESECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON: $364,142 · OtherECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGONMETROPOLITAN PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICES INC: $294,311 · OtherMETROPOLITAN PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICES INCTHE IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION: $151,483 · OtherTHE IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONMontefoire Medical Center: $45,139 · OtherPueblo Unido PDX: $368,000 · Human ServicesPueblo Unido PDXLutheran Community Services Northwest: $240,470 · Human ServicesLutheran Community Services NorthwestIMMIGRATION COUNSELING SERVICE INC: $135,489 · Human ServicesIMMIGRATION COUNSELING SERVICE INCTeambrownsville Inc: $45,139 · Human ServicesTeambrownsville IncCONTIGO IMMIGRANT JUSTICE: $210,685 · Crime & LegalCONTIGO IMMI…SAFE PASSAGE PROJECT CORPORATION: $45,139 · Crime & LegalSAFE PASSAGE…
Other$1,244,228Human Services$789,098Crime & Legal$255,824

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPueblo Unido PDX: $368,000 over 3y, 20% of budgetMETROPOLITAN PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICES INC: $294,311 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetLutheran Community Services Northwest: $240,470 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCONTIGO IMMIGRANT JUSTICE: $210,685 over 4y, 6.6% of budgetTHE IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION: $151,483 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetIMMIGRATION COUNSELING SERVICE INC: $135,489 over 3y, 5.4% of budgetSAFE PASSAGE PROJECT CORPORATION: $45,139 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTeambrownsville Inc: $45,139 over 1y, 4.3% 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.

The Collins FoundationMeyer Memorial TrustThe Oregon Community …Oregon Law FoundationVanguard Charitable E…Paypal Charitable Giv…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Collins FoundationOR15.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Collins Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Oregon Community Foundation · Oregon Law Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Innovation Law Lab funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Innovation Law Lab. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 20%
  • Pueblo Unido Pdx: 100% of income from government
  • Immigration Counseling Service Inc: 20% of income from government
  • The Immigrant and Refugee Community Organization: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 Innovation Law Lab?

Find your warmest path to Innovation Law Lab 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 11 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $8k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Innovation Law Lab’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