Skip to content
Oakw Fund at a glance

· Public charity

Oakw Fund

To engage in and advocate for economic and educational opportunities, public health, safety, and justice, and for strengthening civic engagement and democratic institutions and norms.

$6.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$1.1M
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, FY2023 to 2025.

Public Benefit$6.9MEnvironment$3.9MHuman Services$1.1MCivil Rights$715kInternational$575kHealth$50k
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k7 grants · $850k
  • $250k+9 grants · $5.2M
$310,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$48k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN$1,050,000
CENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION$1,000,000
ENERGY ACTION FUND$800,000
LOCAL JOBS & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND$600,000
WORKING AMERICA ACTION$450,000
US GLOBAL LEADERSHIP CAMPAIGN$350,000
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS$350,000
THE PIPELINE FUND$310,000
SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND$300,000
FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY ACTION$200,000
THIRD WAY$150,000
CLEARPATH ACTION$150,000
UNLOCK AID COALITION$125,000
NRDC ACTION FUND INC PAC$100,000
INCLUSIVE ABUNDANCE ACTION INC$75,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY23–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 86% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%LOCAL JOBS & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND: $600k → 11%PRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN: $1.1M → 7%Organize Action: $250k → 9%FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY ACTION: $200k → 10%ENERGY ACTION FUND: $800k → 10%NRDC ACTION FUND INC PAC: $100k → 17%Future Now Action: $1.0M → 14%THE PIPELINE FUND: $310k → 10%WorkMoney Inc: $1.1M → 17%INCLUSIVE ABUNDANCE ACTION INC: $75k → 9%CLEARPATH ACTION: $150k → 10%MS Votes Action Fund: $50k → 23%DemocracyFIRST: $500k → 7%Energy Action Fund: $500k → 10%VITAL STRATEGIES ACTION FUND INC: $50k → 17%Future Forward USA Action: $500k → 14%Organizing Empowerment Proj: $250k → 10%LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS: $350k → 14%League of Conservation Voters: $330k → 14%House Majority Forward: $200k → 14%Defending Democracy Together: $100k → 14%State Democracy Action Fund: $50k → 14%Democracy SENTRY: $500k → 14%Center for Voter Information: $1.0M → 14%CENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION: $1.0M → 14%Sixteen Thirty Fund: $540k → 14%US GLOBAL LEADERSHIP CAMPAIGN: $350k → 14%SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $300k → 14%Sixteen Thirty Fund: $200k → 14%UNLOCK AID COALITION: $125k → 14%THIRD WAY: $150k → 14%Unlock Aid Coalition: $100k → 14%Bend the Arc Jewish Action: $15k → 14%WORKING AMERICA ACTION: $450k → 14%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

WI
NY
MA
CT
CA
DE
NC
DC
MS
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.

34%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.2M · 4 repeat orgs$8.0M to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
12

Total granted

$4.2M
$4.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
0%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 39% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.5M went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
Civil RightsPublic BenefitEnvironmentInternationalCommunity ImprovementOther
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
    CENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION
    2× · 2024–2025 · $2.0M · revenue 0%
  • EA
    ENERGY ACTION FUND
    2× · 2024–2025 · $1.3M · revenue 0%
  • LO
    LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC
    2× · 2023–2025 · $680k · revenue +136%

Funded once

  • WI
    WORKMONEY INC
    one grant, 2024 · $1.1M · revenue 0%
  • FN
    FUTURE NOW ACTIONgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $1.0M · revenue +27%
  • D
    DEMOCRACYFIRSTgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $500k · revenue +140%
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
Democracy Forward

See schedule o.this organization seeks to build collective power to defend and advance a vibrant democracy that benefits all people.

—
2
One for Democracy Action Fund

One for democracy unlocks resources to build a healthy democracy by fostering meaningful relationships between philanthropists and the democracy leaders of our time.

—
3
Fdd Action

FDD Action is a non-profit, non-partisan 504(c)4 organization established to advocate for effective policies to promote U.S. National Security and defend free nations.

Community Improvement
4
Democracy Works Inc

The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.

Civil Rights
5
Democracy Forward Foundation

To protect the rights and institutions that make our nation's democracy strong by working through the legal system and administrative processes to preserve the rule of law and hold government accountable, and to educate the public about…

Crime & Legal
6
Voteamerica

The mission of voteamerica is to strengthen united states democracy by increasing voter turnout.

Civil Rights
7
States United Action

States united action is a nonpartisan section 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization with a mission to protect our elections and our democracy. (continued on schedule o)states united action advances election protection, holds democracy violators…

Civil Rights
8
Fair Democracy

Fair democracy works to ensure that the roots of american democracy are healthy with strong voting rights and access, an engaged and informed electorate, an open and accountable government and trusted messengers engaging americans in civil…

Civil Rights
9
Issue One

Issue one is the leading crosspartisan political reform organization that educates the public, engages capitol hill, and advocates for solutions to fix our broken political system.

Public Benefit
10
Powerswitch Action

Powerswitch action is a national network forging collective democracy and economies in our cities and states, together with our 21 grassroots affiliates.

Community Improvement
11
Commission On Presidential Debates

Organize general election presidential and vice-presidential debates

Civil Rights
12
Center for Popular Democracy Inc

The center for popular democracy (cpd) and its affiliates know that everyday people have the power to change the world. we upend business and politics as usual to forge a representative, multiracial government and society where we all…

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pro-Democracy Campaign; the most unlike its peers is Third Way. 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

28 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/28
Grantees still filing
10/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION: $2,000,000 · Civil RightsCENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATIONPRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN: $1,050,000 · Civil RightsPRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGNLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $680,000 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INCDEMOCRACY SENTRY: $500,000 · Civil RightsDEMOCRACY SENTRYORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT PROJECT INC: $250,000 · Civil RightsORGANIZE ACTION: $250,000 · Civil Rights+2 more: $200,000 · Civil RightsWORKMONEY INC: $1,125,000 · OtherWORKMONEY INCLOCAL JOBS & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND INC: $600,000 · OtherLOCAL JOBS & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT…DEMOCRACYFIRST: $500,000 · OtherDEMOCRACYFIRSTWORKING AMERICA ACTION: $450,000 · OtherWORKING AMERICA ACTIONUS Global Leadership Campaign: $350,000 · OtherUS Global Leadership CampaignThe Pipeline Fund: $310,000 · OtherThe Pipeline FundFOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY ACTION: $200,000 · OtherCLEARPATH ACTION FOR CONSERVATIVE CLEAN ENERGY INC: $150,000 · Other+3 more: $250,000 · Other+3 moreENERGY ACTION FUND: $1,300,000 · EnvironmentENERGY ACTION FUNDSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $1,040,000 · EnvironmentSIXTEEN THIRTY FUNDFUTURE NOW ACTION: $1,000,000 · Public BenefitFUTURE NOW ACT…FUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION: $500,000 · Public BenefitFUTURE FORWARD…INCLUSIVE ABUNDANCE INITIATIVE INC: $75,000 · Public Benefit+2 more: $65,000 · Public BenefitUNLOCK AID COALITION: $225,000 · InternationalHOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD: $200,000 · Community Improvement
Civil Rights$4,930,000Other$3,935,000Environment$2,340,000Public Benefit$1,640,000International$225,000Community Improvement$200,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCENTER FOR VOTER INFORMATION: $2,000,000 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetENERGY ACTION FUND: $1,300,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetWORKMONEY INC: $1,125,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetPRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN: $1,050,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $1,040,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetFUTURE NOW ACTION: $1,000,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC: $680,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetDEMOCRACYFIRST: $500,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetFUTURE FORWARD USA ACTION: $500,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDEMOCRACY SENTRY: $500,000 over 1y, 43% of budgetWORKING AMERICA ACTION: $450,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetUS Global Leadership Campaign: $350,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT PROJECT INC: $250,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetORGANIZE ACTION: $250,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetUNLOCK AID COALITION: $225,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetHOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD: $200,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY ACTION: $200,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetCLEARPATH ACTION FOR CONSERVATIVE CLEAN ENERGY INC: $150,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetNRDC ACTION FUND INC: $100,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetDEFENDING DEMOCRACY TOGETHER: $100,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetMISSISSIPPI VOTES ACTION FUND CORPORATION: $50,000 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetSTATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND: $50,000 over 1y, 6.7% of budgetBEND THE ARC JEWISH ACTION INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.6% 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.

Sixteen Thirty FundBright Future FundOur American Future A…Tides AdvocacyFuture Forward USA Ac…America VotesHopewell FundAdvocacy Action Fund …North FundOpen Society Action F…Impetus FundPacific Environmental…
Sixteen Thirty FundDC31.2× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Bright Future Fund · Our American Future Action · Tides Advocacy · Future Forward USA Action · America Votes · Hopewell Fund · Advocacy Action Fund Inc · North Fund · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Impetus Fund · Pacific Environmental Coalition

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 Oakw Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Oakw Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Oakw Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Oakw Fund 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 28 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Oakw’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