How much did INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT INC grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 65% of INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT INC’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2023

—

2024

charter townshipgrosse pointeelectionoakclerk recorderrapidswoods

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 244 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k115 grants · $693k
$10k–50k99 grants · $1.7M
$50k–250k20 grants · $1.7M
$250k+10 grants · $6.1M

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

$6.4M

Total assets

Largest grants

CLARK COUNTY ELECTION DEPARTMENT$1,350,000
CITIES FORWARD INC$1,300,000
PARTNERSHIP FOR LARGE ELECTION JURISDICT$856,000
INFORMING DEMOCRACY EDUCATION FUND$600,000
STRONG DEMOCRACY FOUNDATION$400,000
BERNALILLO COUNTY$350,000
WASHOE COUNTY$350,000
CITY OF DETROIT$350,000
US DIGITAL RESPONSE$250,000
PUBLIC RIGHTS PROJECT$250,000
CENTER FOR CIVIC DESIGN$238,000
BOULDER COUNTY$110,000
COUNT MI VOTE EDUCATION FUND$103,750
MESA COUNTY ELECTIONS$100,000
SANTA FE COUNTY$100,000

02The need

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY23–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 10%. 78% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

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

Democracy Works Inc

Improving civic participation by simplifying and modernizing the voting process for voters and election administrators.

Civil Rights

Center for Effective Public Policy Inc

Improve systems of justice by sharing expertise, promoting research & facilitating change

—

Competitive Enterprise Institute

Public policy research/education dedicated to principles of free enterprise & limited government.

—

The Center for Election Innovation & Research

CEIR seeks to restore trust in the American election system and promote election procedures that encourage participation while ensuring election integrity and security.

Civil Rights

Digital Education Project

Strengthen democracy by preparing individuals to make sense of the past and navigate our digital present.

Education

Partnership for Public Service Inc

The partnership for public service works to build a better government and a stronger democracy.

Employment

Pro Publica Inc

To expose abuses of power and betrayals of the public trust. [see continuation on schedule o] by government, business, and other institutions, using the moral force of investigative journalism to spur reform through the sustained…

Arts & Culture

Center for European Policy Analysis

To ensure a strong and democratic transatlantic alliance for future generations.

Social Science

Council for Court Excellence

Bring people together to research, educate, & advocate for a fair, equitable dc legal system.

—

Center for American Progress

Our aim is not just to change the conversation, but to change the country.

Civil Rights

Colorado Public Interest Research Foundation Inc

The corporation is organized exclusively for educational and research purposes within the meaning of section 501c3 of the internal revenue code of 1954 (or corresponding provisions of any future u.s internal revenue law), including for…

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Work for America Inc and the most unlike its peers is Partnership for Large Election Juri. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

12 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

12/12

Grantees still filing

8/12

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$6,637,194Public Benefit$2,259,750Civil Rights$888,000Public Safety & Disaster$250,000Arts & Culture$100,000Community Improvement$35,000Education$20,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Center for Technology and Civic LifeIL126.1× affinity139 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Center for Technology and Civic Life · The Recycling Partnership Inc · Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Inc · Community Foundation for Southeast · Battle Creek Community Foundation · Fair Food Network Inc · Grosse Pointe Public Safety · Democracy Fund Inc · Woodward Dream Cruise Inc · Ascension Providence Hospital · National Recreation and Park Association · United Way for Southeastern Michigan

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organisation INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT INC funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

2get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

04Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: PARTNERSHIP FOR LARGE ELECTION JURISDICT.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~6 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 2 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

2 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 6.6× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 883982494 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on PARTNERSHIP FOR LARGE ELECTION JURISDICT, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 6 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 29% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Institute for Responsive Government Inc?

Find your warmest path to Institute for Responsive Government Inc through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

12 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Institute for Responsive Government Inc?

More from the funding graph

INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

12 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Institute for Responsive Government Inc?

More from the funding graph