Skip to content
Local Jobs & Economic Development Fund Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Local Jobs & Economic Development Fund Inc

Local jobs & economic development fund supports local clean energy deployment across the u.s.

$8.5M
Granted FY2024still arriving
35
Grants FY2024still arriving
21
States reached
$1.7M
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, FY2022 to 2024.

Environment$10MHuman Services$165kEducation$85kCommunity Improvement$24kPublic Benefit$16kCivil Rights$8k
02FY2024 · 35 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $264k
  • $50k–250k15 grants · $1.6M
  • $250k+8 grants · $6.6M
$85,000
Median grant
21
States reached
$8.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMERICAN JOBS AND ENERGY SECURITY$1,654,000
CONSERVATIVES FOR A CLEAN ENERGY FUTURE$1,460,000
WORKING FAMILIES PARTY PAC$1,175,000
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC$700,000
NEBRASKA CONSERVATION VOTERS$527,000
FARM TO POWER INC$500,000
TCE VOTECLEANORG PAC$377,500
CLEAN UP THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT$250,000
KANSANS FOR AN AFFORDABLE FUTURE$185,000
MICHIGAN DEMOCRATIC STATE CENTRAL COMMITTEE$175,000
ACCELERATE ACTION INC$165,000
ALASKA PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP INC$150,000
LEAD LOCALLY$125,000
ONE TALLAHASSEE PAC$100,000
DEMOCRACYFIRST PAC$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 (FY24–24, $165k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ACCELERATE ACTION INC: $165k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
MT
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
NV
OH
CA
CO
NE
MO
VA
MD
DE
AZ
NM
KS
AR
SC
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.

38%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.0M · 9 repeat orgs$6.5M to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 26 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
15

Total granted

$4.0M
$893k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
+55%

Still filing today

100%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 34% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5.6M went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
EnvironmentPublic BenefitCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementFood & NutritionHuman ServicesOther
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

  • CF
    Conservatives for a Clean Energy Future
    2× · 2023–2024 · $1.8M · revenue +139% · 29% of their budget
  • NC
    Nebraska Conservation Voters
    2× · 2023–2024 · $777k · revenue +10% · 55% of their budget
  • TA
    TIDES ADVOCACY
    2× · 2023–2024 · $360k · revenue +41%

Funded once

  • ED
    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $290k · revenue +24%
  • CV
    CONSERVATIVE VALUES PAC
    one grant, 2023 · $191k
  • GC
    GEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS ED FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +44%
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
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
2
Policy Action for a Clean Tomorrow Inc

Clean Tomorrow advances policies that reduce climate emissions by turning policy ambition into action. We work to catalyze rapid change that will accelerate the innovation and growth of clean energy.

Environment
3
Texas Clean Energy Coalition
—
4
Texas Campaign for the Environment

Empowering Texans to fight pollution through sustained grassroots organizing campaigns that shift corporate and governmental policy.

Environment
5
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
6
American Common Ground Council Inc

ConservAmerica is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to the development and advancement of market based energy, environmental, and conservation policy.

Environment
7
Conservative Energy Network

To champion secure, reliable, affordable, clean American energy.

Environment
8
Cleaner Economy Coalition Inc

Driving american jobs and competitiveness by leveraging our cleaner economy and enabling u.s. manufacturers to lead in advanced energy technologies.

—
9
United for Clean Power

United for Clean Power is focused on public policies that build a 21st century energy future.

Environment
10
Evergreen Action

Advocate for and reform to climate policies at the national and state level.

Human Services
11
California Environmental Voters Education Fund

ENVIROVOTERS ED FUND is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to improving the quality of the environment for all Californians. ENVIROVOTERS ED FUND works to build the capacity of environmental organizations by developing and providing…

Environment
12
Clean Energy for America Inc

Clean Energy for Americas purpose is to engage with clean energy workers and advance the clean energy movement. CE4A highlights the feasibility and positive impact of a clean energy economy, educates policymakers and the general public on…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is League of Conservation Voters Inc; the most unlike its peers is Citizens for Trusted Community Leadership. 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 50 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
18/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Conservatives for a Clean Energy Future: $1,760,000 · OtherConservatives for a Clean Energy FutureAMERICAN JOBS AND ENERGY SECURITY FUND: $1,654,000 · OtherAMERICAN JOBS AND ENERGY SECURITY FUNDWORKING FAMILIES PARTY NATIONAL PAC: $1,175,000 · OtherWORKING FAMILIES PARTY NATIONAL PACNebraska Conservation Voters: $777,000 · OtherNebraska Conservation VotersTCE VOTECLEANORG PAC: $377,500 · OtherTIDES ADVOCACY: $359,500 · Other+30 more: $1,510,381 · Other+30 moreCLEAN UP THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT: $350,000 · EnvironmentCLEAN UP TH…ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND: $290,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENT…Renew Missouri Advocates: $143,000 · EnvironmentRenew Misso…GEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS ED FUND: $100,000 · EnvironmentGEORGIA CON…CONSERVATION VOTERS OF SC EDUC FUND: $99,400 · EnvironmentCONSERVATIO…CO-OP LEADERSHIP ACADEMY: $42,000 · EnvironmentLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $700,000 · Civil Rights+1 more: $15,898 · Civil RightsFARM-TO-POWER INC: $500,000 · Food & NutritionKANSANS FOR AN AFFORDABLE FUTURE: $235,000 · Public BenefitAlaska Public Interest Research Group: $190,000 · Public BenefitPUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 · Public BenefitACCELERATE ACTION INC: $165,000 · Human ServicesAnnie's List Training and Engagement Fund: $15,000 · Community Improvement
Other$7,613,381Environment$1,024,400Civil Rights$715,898Food & Nutrition$500,000Public Benefit$475,000Human Services$165,000Community Improvement$15,000

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 budgetConservatives for a Clean Energy Future: $1,760,000 over 2y, 29% of budgetAMERICAN JOBS AND ENERGY SECURITY FUND: $1,654,000 over 1y, 83% of budgetNebraska Conservation Voters: $777,000 over 2y, 55% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $700,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetFARM-TO-POWER INC: $500,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY: $359,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetCLEAN UP THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT: $350,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE ACTION FUND: $290,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetKANSANS FOR AN AFFORDABLE FUTURE: $235,000 over 2y, 71% of budgetAlaska Public Interest Research Group: $190,000 over 2y, 8.4% of budgetACCELERATE ACTION INC: $165,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetRenew Missouri Advocates: $143,000 over 2y, 7.6% of budgetArizonans for a Clean Economy: $125,000 over 2y, 38% of budgetGEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS ED FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetCONSERVATION VOTERS OF SC EDUC FUND: $99,400 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetWESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS: $85,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK: $75,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetSEMILLA ACTION: $50,000 over 1y, 8.0% of budgetPUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGROUNDWORK CENTER FOR RESILIENT COMMUNITIES INC: $50,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetNEVADA ALLIANCE: $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCO-OP LEADERSHIP ACADEMY: $42,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $15,898 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAnnie's List Training and Engagement 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Tides AdvocacyEnergy Action FundSixteen Thirty FundWindward FundUnited States Energy …League of Conservatio…American Jobs and Ene…Green Advocacy ProjectOur American Future A…Way to Win Action Fun…The Energy FoundationAll Hands on Deck Net…
Tides AdvocacyCA25.1× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Advocacy · Energy Action Fund · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Windward Fund · United States Energy Foundation · League of Conservation Voters Inc · American Jobs and Energy Security Fund · Green Advocacy Project · Our American Future Action · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · The Energy Foundation · All Hands on Deck Network 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 Local Jobs & Economic Development Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Local Jobs & Economic Development Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 Local Jobs & Economic Development Fund Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Local Jobs & Economic Development Fund 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 50 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 Local Jobs & Economic Development’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