· Public charity
Mujeres Unidas y Activas
MUAis an organization of Latina and Indigenous immigrant women with the mission of growing our personal and community power to achieve social and economic justice.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $197k
- $50k–250k6 grants · $448k
- $250k+1 grant · $3.8M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Ctr Empowered Politics Edu Fd | $3,833,615 |
| Dolores Street Community Svcs | $86,356 |
| Bend the ArcHand in Hand | $86,137 |
| Filipino Advocates for Jstice | $74,357 |
| Pilipino Workers Center | $68,567 |
| CHIRLA | $67,240 |
| IDEPSCA | $65,728 |
| Chinese Progressive Assoc | $46,904 |
| Centro Laboral de Graton | $29,190 |
| WERC Golden Gate University | $25,833 |
| Filipino American Dvlpmnt Ctr | $22,289 |
| Pomona Economic Opprtnity Ctr | $21,240 |
| Centro Cultural de Mexico | $19,779 |
| Filipino Migrant Center | $18,873 |
| Step Forward Foundation | $12,464 |
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 (FY17–24, $994k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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 +63% since the first grant, against +37% for the ones you funded once.
19 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 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, 15% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.8M 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
- MAMISSION ACTION INC8× · 2017–2024 · $924k · revenue +301%
- FAFILIPINO ADVOCATES FOR JUSTICE7× · 2017–2024 · $766k · revenue +356%
- PWPILIPINO WORKERS CENTER OF SOUTHERN8× · 2017–2024 · $746k · revenue +29%
Funded once
- DGDANCERS GROUPgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $54k · revenue +55%
- TFTHE FILIPINO COMMUNITY CENTER INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $38k · revenue +43%
- FFFreedom for Immigrantsgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $38k · revenue +124%
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.
La Raza Centro Legal San Francisco provides high quality, highly trusted, free legal services to low-income or immigrant clients in the San Francisco Bay Area.
A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…
Fuerza Laboral is a workers' rights center whose mission is to shift the balance of power in our economy in favor of workers by educating, training, and organizing workers to become community leaders; taking direct action to recover unpaid…
The Asian Law Caucus's mission is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities, recognizing that social, economic, political and racial inequalities continue to exist…
To provide transformative legal services that enable diverse communities in East Palo Alto and beyond to achieve a secure and thriving future.
Pangea's mission is to provide deportation defense services, advocate for policy change, and provide education and legal empowerment for our immigrant communities.
The California Center for Movement Legal Services (Movement Legal) provides legal services in the pursuit of improving the lives of California's traditionally underserved residents, carrying out legal work that fosters community led policy…
As one of the most enduring civil rights institutions on the West Coast, we work to dismantle systems of oppression and racism, and build an equitable and just society.
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.
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.
Legal Link removes legal barriers that prolong poverty by adding critically needed capacity to the legal ecosystem.
Immigrant Defenders Law Center (ImmDef) is a next-generation social justice law firm that defends our immigrant communities against injustices in the immigration system.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Filipino Advocates for Justice and the most unlike its peers is Wladyslaw Poniecki Charitable Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 33 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
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 28 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 CENTER FOR EMPOWERED POLITICS EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds MISSION ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds FILIPINO ADVOCATES FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds PILIPINO WORKERS CENTER OF SOUTHERN ↗
- Who funds COALITION FOR HUMANE IMMIGRANT RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds BEND THE ARC - A JEWISH PARTNERSHIP FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTO DE EDUCACION POPULAR DEL SUR DE CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds Centro Laboral de Graton ↗
- Who funds CHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds POMONA ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds Filipino-American Development Foundation ↗
- Who funds GOLDEN GATE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THOUSAND CURRENTS ↗
- Who funds CENTRO CULTURAL DE MEXICO EN EL CONDADO DE ORANGE ↗
- Who funds Filipino Migrant Center ↗
- Who funds Human Agenda ↗
- Who funds San Francisco Senior and Disability Action DBA Senior & Disability Action ↗
- Who funds STEP FORWARD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DANCERS GROUP ↗
- Who funds THE FILIPINO COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Freedom for Immigrants ↗
- Who funds CENTRO LEGAL DE LA RAZA ↗
- Who funds WLADYSLAW PONIECKI CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO WOMEN AGAINST RAPE ↗
- Who funds MALDEF - MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND ↗
- Who funds Street Level Health Project ↗
- Who funds Causa Justa Just Cause ↗
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: Tides Center · National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc · The California Endowment · The James Irvine Foundation · Chinese Progressive Association · The San Francisco Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Liberty Hill Foundation · Tides Foundation · National Day Laborer Organizing Network · Movement Strategy Center
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 Mujeres Unidas y Activas 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.