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

· Public charity

Organize Action

ORGANIZE ACTION works to advance social welfare and support the common good and general welfare by promoting democracy and advancing human rights.

$6.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
41
Grants FY2024still arriving
18
States reached
$975k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 FY2022–2024.

Public Benefit$7.4MCivil Rights$488kHuman Services$360kCommunity Improvement$150k
02FY2024 · 41 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k8 grants · $125k
  • $50k–250k28 grants · $4.0M
  • $250k+5 grants · $2.7M
$150,000
Median grant
18
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CARE IN ACTION$975,000
ASIAN AMERICAN ADVOCACY FUND INC$585,000
BATTLEGROUND NY ACTION FUND$498,250
MI PODER$337,500
UNITE HERE ACTION FUND$300,000
1K WOMEN STRONG INC$237,500
INSTITUTO POWER$202,375
CAROLINA FEDERATION$200,000
WE THE PEOPLE ACTION FUND$200,000
NCAAT IN ACTION$200,000
DETROIT ACTION C-4$200,000
DOWN HOME NORTH CAROLINA$200,000
LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA$200,000
MICHIGAN PEOPLE'S CAMPAIGN$200,000
OUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA$200,000
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 (FY22–24, $880k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 18% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $200k → 11%CHINESE PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL ACTION: $100k → 16%REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL: $60k → 14%NCAAT IN ACTION: $200k → 8%NORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND: $200k → 8%NORTH CAROLINA ASIAN AMERICANS TOGETHER: $120k → 8%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

IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
NV
PA
CA
NE
MO
KY
VA
AZ
NC
DC
MS
AL
GA
TX
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.

22%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.8M · 6 repeat orgs$6.6M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +42% since the first grant, against -10% for the ones you funded once.

6 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 36 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
10

Total granted

$1.8M
$777k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
-10%

Still filing today

100%
90%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 16% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5.8M went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
Civil RightsHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitInternationalOther

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

  • NI
    NCAAT IN ACTION
    2× · 2022–2024 · $320k · revenue +212%
  • MW
    MISSOURI WIN
    2× · 2023–2024 · $250k · revenue +236%
  • FA
    Freedom Action Now
    2× · 2022–2023 · $183k · revenue +42%

Funded once

  • FM
    FUSE Mississippi
    one grant, 2023 · $150k · 100% of their budget
  • OA
    ONE APIA TEXAS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $100k
  • CP
    CHINESE PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL ACTION INC
    one grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue -63% · 33% of their budget

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
America Votes

The Organization was established to coordinate and promote progressive issues, policies, initiatives, and referenda, and to pursue electoral reform that expands access to the ballot.

Community Improvement
2
Progressive Workers Coalition

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.

—
3
Colorado People's Action

Colorado people's action (cpa) is a member-driven, racial justice organization dedicated to winning long-lasting progressive public policies in colorado. cpa builds power by mobilizing voters, electing our own people to office, holding…

—
4
American Workers for Progress

American workers for progress works to ensure that leaders at every level are focused on reducing barriers to job growth and addressing economic challenges to guarantee a better future for all americans.

—
5
Missouri Workers Power

Our mission is to advocate for a just and equitable economy where poor and working people make more of the decisions that affect their daily lives. Through civic engagement, political advocacy, and issue-based voter education and…

—
6
Organize for Justice

Organize for justice develops diverse campaign leadership by passing on innovations and relationships from one generation of organizers to the next. the organization strives to create public support on issues affecting working americans.

—
7
RepresentUs

RepresentUs is America's leading nonpartisan grassroots organization working for a government accountable to the people. We unite people from all backgrounds to defend democracy, root out corruption, mobilize action, and support campaigns…

Public Benefit
8
National Legal Advocacy Network Dba Glow

The National Legal Advocacy Network d/b/a Grassroots Law & Organizing for Workers is a legal non-profit organization dedicated to using legal strategies as a tool to build power for marginalized workers and create systemic change through…

Crime & Legal
9
Right to Democracy Project

Advance democracy, equity, and self-determination in U.S. territories through participatory advocacy, narrative and cultural change, and ecosystem building.

Civil Rights
10
Six Action

Six action realizes a bold policy agenda that secures and sustains meaningful racial, gender, social and economic justice outcomes that center the people most impacted by systemic and structural oppression. we support values-aligned state…

Civil Rights
11
Asian & Pacific Islander American Vote

It is the mission of APIAVote to encourage and promote civic participation of Asian Pacific Islander Americans in the electoral and public processes at the national, state, and local levels. APIAVote also aims to educate and inform Asian…

Civil Rights
12
Missouri Jobs With Justice Voter Action

To develop and advocate for legislation, regulations, ballot initiatives, and government programs as a voice of the working class, to promote social justice, and to stimulate the economy; and, to conduct research, educate the public, and…

Civil Rights

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Splc Action Fund and the most unlike its peers is Virginia Coalition for Progressive Values. 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 backsteadyEnvironmental Conservation …Policy Research and AdvocacyWomen & Girls Leadership De…Pregnancy Support ServicesJewish Community Organizati…
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 7 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%28%<5yr14%44%5–10yr19%16%10–20yr16%9%20–35yr13%0%35–55yr16%3%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%35%<5yr14%57%5–10yr19%6%10–20yr16%1%20–35yr13%0%35–55yr16%1%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 28% of your grantees by number, and just 35% 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%2/52
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,513

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

48 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. 48 of the 52 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.

7
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
48/48
Grantees still filing
8/48
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Care in Action Inc — $975,000 · Civil RightsCare in Action IncASIAN AMERICAN ADVOCACY FUND INC — $645,000 · Civil RightsASIAN AMERICAN ADVOCACY FUND INCBATTLEGROUND NEW YORK ACTION INC — $498,250 · Civil RightsBATTLEGROUND NEW YORK ACTION INCMI PODER — $337,500 · Civil RightsMI PODERNEBRASKA APPLESEED ACTION FUND — $260,000 · Civil RightsUnited for Respect — $200,000 · Civil RightsWe The People Action Fund — $200,000 · Civil RightsOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA — $200,000 · Civil RightsCAROLINA FEDERATION — $200,000 · Civil RightsMichigan Peoples Campaign — $200,000 · Civil RightsSPLC ACTION FUND — $185,000 · Civil RightsFreedom Action Now — $182,500 · Civil Rights+13 more — $1,159,237 · Civil Rights+13 moreUNITE HERE ACTION FUND — $300,000 · OtherUNITE HERE ACTION F…1K Women Strong Inc — $237,500 · Other1K Women Strong IncDETROIT ACTION — $200,000 · OtherDETROIT ACTIONFUSE Mississippi — $150,000 · OtherFUSE MississippiMOTHERING JUSTICE ACTION FUND — $100,000 · OtherMOTHERING JUSTICE A…ONE APIA TEXAS INC — $100,000 · OtherONE APIA TEXAS INCTeamsters Defending Democracy & Workers Rights — $100,000 · OtherTeamsters Defending…ASIAN PACIFIC ISLANDER POLITICAL AL LIANCE — $50,000 · OtherNew Rural Project — $50,000 · Other+8 more — $125,500 · Other+8 moreNCAAT IN ACTION — $320,000 · Human ServicesNCAAT IN ACTIO…NORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND — $200,000 · Human ServicesNORTH CAROLINA…DOWN HOME NC — $200,000 · Human ServicesDOWN HOME NCLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA — $200,000 · Human ServicesLIVING UNITED …CHINESE PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL ACTION INC — $100,000 · Human ServicesCHINESE PROGRE…REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL — $60,000 · Human ServicesREPRODUCTIVE F…MISSOURI WIN — $250,000 · Community ImprovementWORKER POWER — $150,000 · Community ImprovementInstituto Power — $202,375 · Public BenefitONE APIA NEVADA — $72,750 · International
Civil Rights$5,242,487Other$1,413,000Human Services$1,080,000Community Improvement$400,000Public Benefit$202,375International$72,750

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 budgetCare in Action Inc — $975,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetASIAN AMERICAN ADVOCACY FUND INC — $645,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetBATTLEGROUND NEW YORK ACTION INC — $498,250 over 1y, 9.3% of budgetMI PODER — $337,500 over 1y, 36% of budgetNCAAT IN ACTION — $320,000 over 2y, 7.4% of budgetUNITE HERE ACTION FUND — $300,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetNEBRASKA APPLESEED ACTION FUND — $260,000 over 2y, 30% of budgetMISSOURI WIN — $250,000 over 2y, 8.1% of budget1K Women Strong Inc — $237,500 over 1y, 32% of budgetInstituto Power — $202,375 over 1y, 12% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA A PHILIP RANDOLPH EDUCATIONAL FUND — $200,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetUnited for Respect — $200,000 over 1y, 38% of budgetDOWN HOME NC — $200,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetWe The People Action Fund — $200,000 over 1y, 9.0% of budgetOUR VOICE OUR VOTE ARIZONA — $200,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetCAROLINA FEDERATION — $200,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA — $200,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetMichigan Peoples Campaign — $200,000 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetSPLC ACTION FUND — $185,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetFreedom Action Now — $182,500 over 2y, 16% of budgetMAKE THE ROAD ACTION INC — $160,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetORGANIZE PENNSYLVANIA — $150,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetPennsylvania United — $150,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetWORKER POWER — $150,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetFUSE Mississippi — $150,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetRURAL ARIZONA ACTION — $125,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetARAB AMERICANS FOR PROGRESS — $120,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetMOTHERING JUSTICE ACTION FUND — $100,000 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetCHINESE PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL ACTION INC — $100,000 over 1y, 33% of budgetASIAN AMERICAN MIDWEST PROGRESSIVES — $100,000 over 1y, 57% of budgetCENTER FOR EMPOWERED POLITICS — $72,750 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetONE APIA NEVADA — $72,750 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetFLORIDA RISING INC — $61,487 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetARIZONA WINS — $60,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL — $60,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNew Pennsylvania Project — $50,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetNew Rural Project — $50,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetVirginia Coalition for Progressive Values — $45,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetALL HANDS ON DECK NETWORK INC — $10,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVOCES DE LA FRONTERA ACTION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetUNITED WORKING FAMILIES — $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetMOVE TEXAS ACTION FUND — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetINSTITUTE MIDDLE EAST UNDERSTANDING POLICY PROJECT — $10,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIF NOT NOW MOVEMENT — $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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 AdvocacySixteen Thirty FundAll Hands on Deck Net…Way to Win Action Fun…Open Society Action F…America VotesPro-Democracy CampaignWomen Donors Network …NEO Philanthropy Acti…Tides FoundationState Engagement FundWorking Families Orga…
Tides AdvocacyCA79.5× affinity37 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Advocacy · Sixteen Thirty Fund · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · America Votes · Pro-Democracy Campaign · Women Donors Network Action · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Tides Foundation · State Engagement Fund · Working Families Organization 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 Organize 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Organize Action?

    Find your warmest path to Organize 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.

    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 52 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