Skip to content
One for Democracy Action Fund at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

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.

$1.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$500k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $85k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $767k
  • $250k+1 grant · $500k
$50,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RESILIENT ELECTIONS NETWORK A PROJECT OF CENTER FOR SECURE AND MODERN ELEC$500,000
WORKING FAMILIES PARTY PAC$225,000
ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ACTION$200,000
SHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION$100,000
THE VOTER PROJECT FUND$75,000
AMERICA VOTES$66,500
AMERICA WORKS USA$50,000
COURT ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION (VIA GLOBAL IMPACT SOCIAL WELFARE FUND FISCAL$50,000
CALIFORNIA CALLS ACTION FUND$25,000
AAPI DEMOCRACY FUND$25,000
BAY RISING ACTION (VIA CENTER FOR EMPOWERED POLITICS FISCAL SPONSOR)$15,000
NDN ACTION NETWORK$10,000
POWERCA ACTION$10,000
02The need
02

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:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%CALIFORNIA CALLS ACTION FUND: $25k → 14%NDN ACTION NETWORK: $10k → 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.
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 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 Works Inc

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

Civil Rights
2
Defend the Vote Action Fund

To sustain and support the prioritization of comprehensive voting rights and democracy reform legislation at all levels of government.

—
3
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
4
Register America

The organization is founded for social welfare purposes, including assisting with voter registration and advocating for policies which lead to increased voter registration in the united states.

—
5
Issue One Action

Issue one action is uniting republicans, democrats, and independents to protect our elections and fix our political system. we are committed to free, fair, and secure elections and reducing the influence of well-financed special interests…

—
6
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.

—
7
Voteamerica

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

Civil Rights
8
La Voice Action

La voice action's mission is to build multi-racial, interfaith power to win policies that transforms los angeles into a county that reflects the human dignity of all people, with racial equity and abundance for all.

Civil Rights
9
Network for Civic Action

Network for civic action advocates for the protection of democracy and encourages civic engagement. it evaluates programs and educates donors about how their donations can best serve those goals.

—
10
Climate Equity Action Fund

The climate equity action fund (ceaf) works hand-in-hand with community-based partners in critical states across the country to secure and sustain policy wins for climate and clean energy. building on over a decade of trust with leading…

Environment
11
All Americans Vote

All Americans Vote aims to motivate underrepresented Americans to engage in the most patriotic of exercises - voting!

Civil Rights
12
New American Leaders Action Fund Inc

New american leaders action fund (nalaf) is building a democracy that represents and includes all people by engaging new voters, supporting new americans as they run for office, and expanding civic engagement.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Aapi Democracy Fund; the most unlike its peers is Global Impact Social Welfare Fund. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

13 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
3/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $225,000 · Civil RightsWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INCALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ACTION: $200,000 · Civil RightsALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ACTIONTHE VOTER PROJECT FUND: $75,000 · Civil RightsTHE VOTER PROJECT FUND+2 more: $25,000 · Civil RightsSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $500,000 · EnvironmentSIXTEEN THIRTY FUNDSHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION: $100,000 · Community ImprovementSHERIFF ACCOU…America Votes: $66,500 · Community ImprovementAmerica VotesAMERICA WORKS USA: $50,000 · OtherGlobal Impact Social Welfare Fund: $50,000 · Public BenefitCALIFORNIA CALLS ACTION FUND: $25,000 · Human ServicesNDN ACTION NETWORK INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesAAPI DEMOCRACY FUND: $25,000 · Philanthropy
Civil Rights$525,000Environment$500,000Community Improvement$166,500Other$50,000Public Benefit$50,000Human Services$35,000Philanthropy$25,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $500,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $225,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ACTION: $200,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetSHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION: $100,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetTHE VOTER PROJECT FUND: $75,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAmerica Votes: $66,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICA WORKS USA: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetGlobal Impact Social Welfare Fund: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCALIFORNIA CALLS ACTION FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetAAPI DEMOCRACY FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCENTER FOR EMPOWERED POLITICS: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNDN ACTION NETWORK INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetPOWERCA ACTION FKA MOBILIZE THE IMMIGRANT VOTE ACTION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% 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.

Tides AdvocacySixteen Thirty FundTides FoundationNEO Philanthropy Acti…America VotesGlobal Impact Social …Democracy Fund Voice …Women Donors Network …Our American Future A…Way to Win Action Fun…Open Society Action F…All Hands on Deck Net…
Tides AdvocacyCA21.9× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Advocacy · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Tides Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · America Votes · Global Impact Social Welfare Fund · Democracy Fund Voice Inc · Women Donors Network Action · Our American Future Action · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    0get 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.

    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 13 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $153k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on One for Democracy Action’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