· Public charity
Majority Forward
The organization's mission is to advocate for progressive policies and engaging in nonpartisan voter registration.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k1 grant · $30k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $200k
- $250k+6 grants · $176M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SMP | $68,000,000 |
| DUTY AND HONOR | $45,650,000 |
| AMERICA VOTES | $29,350,000 |
| LAST BEST PLACE PAC | $28,900,000 |
| FAMILY FRIENDLY ACTION FUND | $3,920,000 |
| VOTO LATINO | $250,000 |
| FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY | $200,000 |
| 907 INITIATIVE | $30,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 99% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +86% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4.4M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- DADUTY AND HONOR3× · 2023–2025 · $73M · revenue ×37 · 38% of their budget
- PUPRIORITIES USA3× · 2021–2023 · $9.0M · revenue +86%
- ELEMILYS LIST ACTION2× · 2021–2022 · $465k · revenue +551% · 55% of their budget
Funded once
- DADUTY AND HONORone grant, 2021 · $20M · revenue 0%
- NSNORTH STARone grant, 2021 · $7.1M
- AFAmericans for a Secure Futureone grant, 2021 · $5.5M
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Advocacy concerning democratic values, national security and defense; lobbying of government officials in favor of policies that further the defense of the u.s. and its constitution; development of coalitions with other organizations to…
To sustain and support the prioritization of comprehensive voting rights and democracy reform legislation at all levels of government.
American Prosperity Alliances mission is to advocate for legislative and regulatory policies that advance economic prosperity in America.
Americans against government censorship's mission is to advocate against federal policies that threaten the ability of nonprofits to serve their communities and engage in constitutionally protected activity.
Advancing american freedom foundation (aaff) educates the american people that freedom is the cornerstone of our republic, and that freedom must be fostered and protected against unjustified government encroachment. aaff informs the public…
To protect democracy by advocating for policies to strenghten democracy, educating the public about threats to our democracy, and highlighting the unpopularity of federal policies that places money and power over the rights and freedom of…
Our mission is to increase voting in elections across the United States by offering nonpartisan information primarily across social media and podcast platforms.
All Americans Vote aims to motivate underrepresented Americans to engage in the most patriotic of exercises - voting!
American Voice's mission is to create a more prosperous, fair and free
With a commitment to free market principles, APC focuses on educating the public about conservative fiscal policies that foster job growth, a stronger economy, and increased opportunity for all Americans.
Aaf is dedicated to broad public education on domestic and economic issues, using modern communication tools to engage the public and propose policy solutions. it engages in policy research based on data and provides commentary on domestic…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Strategic Victory Fund and the most unlike its peers is Duty and Honor. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
29 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 29 of the 39 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds America Votes ↗
- Who funds DUTY AND HONOR ↗
- Who funds DUTY AND HONOR ↗
- Who funds PRIORITIES USA ↗
- Who funds Americans for a Secure Future ↗
- Who funds FORWARD ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD ACTION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICANS FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH ↗
- Who funds VOTEVETS ACTION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Save My Country Action Fund ↗
- Who funds END CITIZENS UNITED LET AMERICA VOTE ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds EMILYS LIST ACTION ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE REALITY ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds BLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITION ↗
- Who funds NEVADA ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds VOTO LATINO INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CENTER ↗
- Who funds MONTANA HUNTERS AND ANGLERS ACTION ↗
- Who funds Preserve American Ideals ↗
- Who funds Planned Parenthood New Hampshire Action Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds EQUISLABS ↗
- Who funds RURAL AMERICA FUND ↗
- Who funds RIGHT TO VOTE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC ↗
- Who funds STRATEGIC VICTORY FUND ↗
- Who funds Piedmont Rising Inc ↗
- Who funds ADVANCING AZ ↗
- Who funds 907 INITIATIVE ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · America Votes · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Fund for a Better Future Inc · Future Forward USA Action · Our American Future Action · Tides Foundation · Global Impact Social Welfare Fund · Strategic Victory Fund · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · National Education Association of the United States
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 organization Majority Forward 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Majority Forward?
Find your warmest path to Majority Forward 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.