· Public charity
Missouri Organizing and Voter Engagement Action
Advocating for legislation, regulations, ballot initiatives, and government programs as a voice of average missouri citizens, to promote social justice, and to stimulate the economy, and conducting research, educating the public, and publicizing the positions of elected officials concerning these issues.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 48% of MISSOURI ORGANIZING AND VOTER ENGAGEMENT ACTION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k5 grants · $136k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $505k
- $250k+3 grants · $1.1M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ACTION ST LOUIS POWER PROJECT | $380,666 |
| MISSOURI JOBS WITH JUSTICE VOTER | $377,536 |
| ABORTION ACTION MISSOURI | $372,894 |
| MISSOURI WORKER POWER | $183,960 |
| MISSOURI WORKERS CENTER | $125,757 |
| MISSOURI WIN | $100,000 |
| WE POWER ACTION MISSOURI | $95,047 |
| PROMO FUND | $42,272 |
| MISSOURI JOBS WITH JUSTICE | $37,000 |
| METROPOLITAN CONGREGATIONS UNITED | $37,000 |
| MIDWEST ARTIST PROJECT SERVICES | $10,000 |
| BREAD & ROSES MISSOURI | $10,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY22–24, $86k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those 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.
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 0% since the first grant, against -5% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $515k 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
- MJMISSOURI JOBS WITH JUSTICE VOTER ACTION5× · 2020–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +3% · 55% of their budget
- AAAbortion Action Missouri4× · 2018–2024 · $529k · revenue +618% · 51% of their budget
- MWMissouri Workers Center2× · 2023–2024 · $273k · revenue +178%
Funded once
- LALEADMO ACTIONgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $80k · revenue +220% · 99% of their budget
- ASACTION ST LOUISone grant, 2022 · $75k · revenue -28%
- KTKC TENANTS POWERone grant, 2022 · $70k
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.
Advocating for legislation, regulations, ballot initiatives, and government programs as a voice of average missouri citizens, to promote social justice, and to stimulate the economy, and conducting research, educating the public, and…
Assist in furthering policies of the national labor association, monitoring employment legislation, and providing related education to the organization membership.
Missouri Health Care for All is bringing together a community of passionate activists in our state to advocate for equitable health policies in Missouri, and to advance the broader movement for universal, single-payer health care in the…
The coalition for missouri values seeks to bring members of our community together around a core set of values that undergird our society and community. together, we aim to gather information, educate and inform our fellow citizens and…
Developing and advocating for legislation, regulations ballot initiatives and democratic participation to promote the voice of the working class and promote social justice.
We have advocated for the second amendment rights of all law abiding citizens of missouri.
The St. Louis Workers Education Society (WES) educates and trains St. Louis residents, especially people of color, women and youth, to become community leaders. Our focus is on the intersection of workers rights, racial justice, sexual and…
To educate and inform missouri residents on the mechanics of and issues existing in state politics. among other things, the organization will offer 501(c)3 organizations technical support in educating the general public on policy issues.
To provide innovative solutions to create lasting, transformative change to ensure that st. louis is a more equitable place to live, work and be happy.
Promotion, support, and coordination of activities to improve the legal system in Missouri through education, research and legislative reforms.
To ensure that working class people are educated on their voting rights. The coalition engages in mobilization and educational information sessions to ensure that all workers voices are heard.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Missouri Jobs With Justice Voter Action and the most unlike its peers is Sierra Club. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
27 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. 27 of the 36 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 MISSOURI JOBS WITH JUSTICE VOTER ACTION ↗
- Who funds ACTION ST LOUIS POWER PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Abortion Action Missouri ↗
- Who funds Missouri Workers Center ↗
- Who funds PROGRESS MO ↗
- Who funds Heartland Action ↗
- Who funds Missouri Workers Power ↗
- Who funds ORGANIZATION FOR BLACK STRUGGLE ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI WIN ↗
- Who funds Missouri Rural Action ↗
- Who funds LEADMO ACTION ↗
- Who funds ACTION ST LOUIS ↗
- Who funds MISSOURIANS FOR HEALTHY FAMILIES AND FAI ↗
- Who funds WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC ↗
- Who funds URBAN LEAGUE OF KANSAS CITY MO ↗
- Who funds PROMO FUND ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI JOBS WITH JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Missouri Health Care Action ↗
- Who funds PRESERVE MIDDLE CLASS AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds METRO ORGANIZATION FOR RACIAL ECONOMIC EQUITY INC ↗
- Who funds CONSTRUCTION & GENERAL LABORER'S LO ↗
- Who funds BREAD & ROSES MISSOURI ↗
- Who funds COMMITTEE TO PROTECT MISSOURI FAMILIES ↗
- Who funds Planned Parenthood Great Rivers Action ↗
- Who funds ARCHCITY DEFENDERS ↗
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: Missouri Organizing and Voter Engagement Collaborative · Missouri Win · St Louis Community Foundation Inc · Health Forward Foundation · Joseph & Florence Roblee Foundation · Gezellig Foundation · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Tides Advocacy · Tides Foundation · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Community Foundation for Greater Atlanta Inc
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 Missouri Organizing and Voter Engagement Action 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 Missouri Organizing and Voter Engagement Action?
Find your warmest path to Missouri Organizing and Voter Engagement Action 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.