Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Nextgen Climate Action

Nextgen america empowers young people to engage in the democratic process through voter registration and civic engagement on issues of public policy.

$5.3M
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$4.5M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.

Environment$46MPublic Benefit$3.7MCivil Rights$2.5MCrime & Legal$1.0MCommunity Improvement$579kHuman Services$472kEducation$264kYouth Development$216kOther$0
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $181k
  • $250k+2 grants · $5.1M
$127,478
Median grant
4
States reached
$4.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEXTGEN CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE$4,500,000
PROJECT I VOTED INC$575,000
YOUNG PEOPLE'S ALLIANCE EDUCATION FUND$127,478
UNIDOS US ACTION FUND$54,000
VIACOM$20,000
EMERGE$10,000
02The need
03

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:

Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $525k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 74% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SIREN: $135k → 8%IMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER: $300k → 10%CASA IN ACTION: $10k → 11%SOMALI BANTU ASSOC OF AMERICA: $20k → 11%TIDES CENTER: $50k → 10%EMERGE: $10k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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

WA
MN
WI
MI
NY
OR
NV
CA
CO
MO
MD
AZ
NM
NC
DC
FL

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

37%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$20M · 12 repeat orgs$35M to everyone else

12 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
61

Total granted

$20M
$34M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
+54%

Still filing today

83%
85%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $659k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24
Civil RightsPublic BenefitHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementEducationCrime & LegalOther

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

  • CF
    CENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ACTION
    3× · 2017–2019 · $779k · revenue +83%
  • TP
    The Partnership Project Action Fund
    3× · 2017–2019 · $473k · revenue +6%
  • CR
    California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
    2× · 2017–2018 · $270k · revenue +222%

Funded once

  • CE
    CLEAN ENERGY FOR A HEALTHY ARIZONA
    one grant, 2018 · $23M
  • CE
    CLEAN ENERGY HEALTHY MICHIGAN
    one grant, 2018 · $4.2M
  • AV
    America Votesgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $688k · revenue +495%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your 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.

1
California Forward

Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…

Public Benefit
2
American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

The american civil liberties union of northern california (aclu nc union) defends and advances the principles of freedom, equality and justice contained in the united states constitution. aclu nc union, a california mutual benefit…

—
3
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
4
Aclu California Action

See schedule oaclu california action advocates for the defense and advancement of civil liberties and civil rights in the california state capitol. we work to secure greater equality, equity, justice, and freedom for all californians. our…

Civil Rights
5
Consumer Attorneys of California

To advance the science of jurisprudence; to establish a closer relationship of the members with the state bar association of california; to promote the administration of justice and the uniformity of legislation and judicial decisions; to…

—
6
California Environmental Voters

To increase public awareness of elected officials' performances on environmental issues, to influence decisions of public officials on environmental legislation and policy, and to engage in related social welfare activities to promote and…

Civil Rights
7
The Alliance for Collective Action

The Alliance for Collective Action convenes leaders of environmental and social movements to advance solutions for a thriving planet. We advance our mission through the Alliance Center building and community, as well as through Collective…

Environment
8
California Environmental Justice Alliance

Our mission is to fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…

Environment
9
Jobs with Justice San Francisco

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,…

Employment
10
California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance

California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.

Environment
11
California Chamber of Commerce

Represent members and cal employers to members of cal legislature and other agencies of state government through in-house legislative analysts, lobbying staff, and contract lobbyists. cal chamber publishes books and software related to…

—
12
National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development

National CAPACD advances equity and creates vibrant, healthy neighborhoods by mobilizing and strengthening a powerful coalition of community-based organizations working in low-income Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander…

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for Community Change Action and the most unlike its peers is Student Debt Crisis. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyGovernment Accountability R…Urban Agriculture & Food Ac…Public University Foundatio…Lgbtq+ Community CentersLand Conservation Organizat…Muslim Community Organizati…Asian American Advocacy & H…Legal Aid & Immigration Ser…Environmental Advocacy Orga…
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 23 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%2%<5yr14%6%5–10yr19%35%10–20yr16%36%20–35yr13%15%35–55yr16%6%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%2%<5yr14%9%5–10yr19%37%10–20yr16%31%20–35yr13%18%35–55yr16%3%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
4%3/81
the rest of the field
13%
240,395/1,819,484

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.

04the grantee network

75 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. 75 of the 81 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.

9
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
22
Early backer (in before they grew)
69/75
Grantees still filing
55/75
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CLEAN ENERGY FOR A HEALTHY ARIZONA — $22,606,000 · OtherCLEAN ENERGY FOR A HEALTHY ARIZONANevadans for a Clean Energy Future — $10,274,234 · OtherNevadans for a Clean Energy FutureNEXTGEN CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEE — $7,350,000 · OtherNEXTGEN CLIMATE ACTION COMMITTEECLEAN ENERGY HEALTHY MICHIGAN — $4,152,610 · OtherCLEAN ENERGY HEALTHY MICHIGAN+34 more — $3,542,708 · Other+34 moreIMPACT DATA & EVENTS INC — $575,000 · Civil RightsTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER — $430,711 · Civil RightsCAIR-FOUNDATION INC — $235,000 · Civil RightsCommunity Water Center Action Fund — $175,000 · Civil RightsWESTERN CONSERVATION ACTION — $175,000 · Civil RightsEQUALITY CALIFORNIA — $160,000 · Civil RightsYOUNG PEOPLES ALLIANCE EDUCATION FUND — $156,478 · Civil RightsORANGE COUNTY VOTER INFORMATION PROJECT — $150,000 · Civil RightsCALIFORNIA CALLS EDUCATION FUND — $99,000 · Civil Rights+4 more — $116,000 · Civil RightsAmerica Votes — $688,493 · Community ImprovementPOLICYLINK — $300,000 · Community ImprovementLA VOICE — $65,000 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY PARTNERS — $50,000 · Community Improvement+1 more — $29,400 · Community ImprovementCENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ACTION — $779,000 · Public BenefitCIVIC EMPOWERMENT COALITION — $100,000 · Public Benefit+6 more — $92,500 · Public BenefitThe Partnership Project Action Fund — $472,500 · EnvironmentENERGY ACTION FUND — $250,000 · EnvironmentSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND — $128,000 · EnvironmentCommunity Water Center — $92,500 · Environment+1 more — $10,000 · EnvironmentIMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER — $300,000 · Human ServicesNAEVA — $137,000 · Human ServicesSERVICES IMMIGRANT RIGHTS AND EDUCATION NETWORK (SIREN) — $135,000 · Human ServicesMISSION EDGE SAN DIEGO — $83,225 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTER — $50,000 · Human Services+3 more — $40,000 · Human ServicesEAST BAY COMMUNITY LAW CENTER — $285,000 · Crime & LegalAMERICANS FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE INC F/K/A FLA IMMIGRANT ADVOCACY CENTER — $225,000 · Crime & LegalAsian Law Caucus — $150,000 · Crime & LegalTHE ANTI-RECIDIVISM COALITION — $25,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$47,925,552Civil Rights$2,272,189Community Improvement$1,132,893Public Benefit$971,500Environment$953,000Human Services$745,225Crime & Legal$685,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNevadans for a Clean Energy Future — $10,274,234 over 3y, 100% of budgetCENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ACTION — $779,000 over 3y, 15% of budgetIMPACT DATA & EVENTS INC — $575,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetThe Partnership Project Action Fund — $472,500 over 3y, 4.7% of budgetTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER — $430,711 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY — $393,750 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetAMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL — $330,215 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetIMMIGRANT LEGAL RESOURCE CENTER — $300,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetPOLICYLINK — $300,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetEAST BAY COMMUNITY LAW CENTER — $285,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetCalifornia Rural Legal Assistance Foundation — $270,000 over 2y, 5.5% of budgetThe Good Land Committee Inc — $250,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetENERGY ACTION FUND — $250,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetCAIR-FOUNDATION INC — $235,000 over 2y, 3.4% of budgetAMERICANS FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE INC F/K/A FLA IMMIGRANT ADVOCACY CENTER — $225,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES — $200,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEQUALITY CALIFORNIA — $160,000 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetUFW FOUNDATION — $158,888 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetYOUNG PEOPLES ALLIANCE EDUCATION FUND — $156,478 over 2y, 28% of budgetAsian Law Caucus — $150,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetORANGE COUNTY VOTER INFORMATION PROJECT — $150,000 over 1y, 29% of budgetSERVICES IMMIGRANT RIGHTS AND EDUCATION NETWORK (SIREN) — $135,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND — $128,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRenew Oregon Action Fund — $125,000 over 1y, 48% of budgetUC LAW SF FOUNDATION — $120,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetHOUSING LB INC — $114,750 over 1y, 75% of budgetSTUDENT DEBT CRISIS — $108,000 over 2y, 95% of budgetCIVIC EMPOWERMENT COALITION — $100,000 over 1y, 97% of budgetNEVADANS FOR SECURE ELECTIONS — $100,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP EDU FUND — $100,000 over 1y, 30% of budgetCALIFORNIA CALLS EDUCATION FUND — $99,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetASIAN PACIFIC AMERICAN LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION — $92,400 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetORGANIZATION OF CHINESE AMERICANS GREATER LOS ANGELES — $90,000 over 1y, 58% of budgetWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION — $85,000 over 1y, 7.1% of budgetMISSION EDGE SAN DIEGO — $83,225 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetNETROOTS FOUNDATION — $75,000 over 3y, 4.9% of budgetLA VOICE — $65,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetUNIDOSUS ACTION FUND INC — $54,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetCOMMUNITY PARTNERS — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMoveOnorg Civic Action — $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTIDES CENTER — $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNAACP EMPOWERMENT PROGRAMS INC — $35,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY FOUNDATION — $31,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCOALITION FOR HUMANE IMMIGRANT RIGHTS — $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMARCH ON MARYLAND — $25,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetGood Samaritan Family Resource Center of San Francisco — $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDEMOS A NETWORK FOR IDEAS AND ACTION LTD — $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budget
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.

Tides FoundationSixteen Thirty FundThe California Endowm…NEO Philanthropy IncTides AdvocacyAmalgamated Charitabl…Open Society Action F…All Hands on Deck Net…The California Wellne…Silicon Valley Commun…The San Francisco Fou…Nextgen Climate Ameri…
Tides FoundationCA34.1× affinity25 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · Sixteen Thirty Fund · The California Endowment · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Tides Advocacy · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · The California Wellness Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Nextgen Climate America 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 Nextgen Climate 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    16report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 81 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines