Skip to content
PICO California at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

PICO California

Our vision is a Moral Economy for California which includes structural campaigns that result in significant material improvements for the most vulnerable Californians: making affordable and dignified housing a human right, reducing the number of people incarcerated and increasing job and housing opportunities for those returning home,…

$1.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$325k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2024.

Community Improvement$2.4MPublic Benefit$1.4MCivil Rights$828kReligion$475kHuman Services$26k
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k8 grants · $923k
  • $250k+1 grant · $325k
$105,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LA Voice$325,000
Faith in the Valley$187,500
Inland Congregations United$165,000
Faith in Action Bay Area$137,500
San Diego Organizing Project$105,000
True North Organizing Network$100,000
Sacramento Area Congregations$95,000
Faith in Action East Bay$73,310
People Acting in Community$60,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY22–22, $82k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Innercity Struggle: $26k → 14%Alliance of Californians for: $56k → 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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.5M · 13 repeat orgs$685k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
9

Total granted

$4.5M
$685k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+14%
+21%

Still filing today

92%
89%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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 RightsCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • FI
    Faith In Action Bay Area
    3× · 2022–2024 · $663k · revenue +51%
  • SD
    SAN DIEGO ORGANIZING PROJECT
    3× · 2022–2024 · $485k · revenue +9% · 27% of their budget
  • SA
    SACRAMENTO AREA CONGREGATIONS TOGETHER
    3× · 2022–2024 · $475k · revenue +33%

Funded once

  • CC
    CALIFORNIA CALLS EDUCATION FUND
    one grant, 2022 · $225k · revenue +8%
  • AI
    ACCE Institute
    one grant, 2023 · $96k · revenue -35%
  • EI
    EMPOWER INITIATIVE
    one grant, 2023 · $96k
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
California Donor Table

California Donor Table anchors a hub of donors, foundations, and community leaders. We pool together our resources to shape California into a truly democratic state that works for the people, not the powerful. Rooted in our commitment to…

Civil Rights
2
Pico California

Our vision is a Moral Economy for California which includes structural campaigns that result in significant material improvements for the most vulnerable Californians: making affordable and dignified housing a human right, reducing the…

Public Benefit
3
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
4
California Black Power Network Action Fund

Promote social welfare thru political policy

Civil Rights
5
Black American Political Association of California

Educate and advocacy

Civil Rights
6
California Center for Movement Legal Services

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…

Crime & Legal
7
Pico California Action Fund

The PICO Action Fund is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization that works with multi-racial faith-based community organizations to build power and impact systemic change. We work at the state and local level to build capacity for civic…

Civil Rights
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
Asian Law Caucus

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…

Crime & Legal
10
Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy

CAUSE's mission is to build grassroots power to realize social, economic and environmental justice for the people of the Central Coast Region through policy research, leadership development, organizing and advocacy.

Community Improvement
11
Central Valley Partnership

The Central Valley Partnership (CVP) conducts and collaborates in training initiatives, including community organizer training, education on labor history and issues, messaging workshops, etc., aimed at fostering the establishment of new…

Civil Rights
12
League of Women Voters of Los Angeles

The League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan political organization, encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and influences public policy through education and…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Powerca Action Fka Mobilize the Immigrant Vote Action; the most unlike its peers is San Diego Organizing Project. 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

20 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. 20 of the 22 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

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

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
13/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Faith In Action Bay Area: $662,500 · OtherFaith In Action Bay AreaSACRAMENTO AREA CONGREGATIONS TOGETHER: $475,000 · OtherSACRAMENTO AREA CONGREGATIONS TOGETHERInland Congregations United for Change Sponsoring Committee Inc: $405,000 · OtherInland Congregations United for Change Sponsoring…People Acting in Community Together: $230,000 · OtherPeople Acting in Community TogetherTRUE NORTH ORGANIZING NETWORK: $220,000 · OtherTRUE NORTH ORGANIZING NETWORKASIAN AMERICAN CIVIC ENGAGEMENT ALLIANCE: $161,167 · OtherASIAN AMERICAN CIVIC ENGAGEMENT ALLIANCEEMPOWER INITIATIVE: $96,250 · OtherSAN DIEGO ORGANIZING PROJECT: $485,000 · Community ImprovementSAN DIEGO ORGANIZING PROJECTFAITH IN THE VALLEY: $462,500 · Community ImprovementFAITH IN THE VALLEYLA VOICE: $420,000 · Community ImprovementLA VOICEFaith In Action East Bay: $414,930 · Community ImprovementFaith In Action East Bay+1 more: $50,000 · Community ImprovementPOWERCA ACTION FKA MOBILIZE THE IMMIGRANT VOTE ACTION: $312,904 · Civil RightsPOWERCA ACTION FKA M…CALIFORNIA CALLS EDUCATION FUND: $225,000 · Civil RightsCALIFORNIA CALLS EDU…COALITION FOR HUMANE IMMIGRANT RIGHTS: $140,836 · Civil RightsCOALITION FOR HUMANE…OC Action: $121,287 · Civil RightsOC ActionCALIFORNIA BLACK POWER NETWORK: $50,000 · Civil RightsCALIFORNIA BLACK POW…LA VOICE ACTION: $45,000 · Civil RightsCENTER FOR EMPOWERED POLITICS: $40,000 · Civil RightsACCE Institute: $96,257 · EducationAlliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Action: $56,337 · Human ServicesINNERCITY STRUGGLE: $26,000 · Human Services
Other$2,249,917Community Improvement$1,832,430Civil Rights$935,027Education$96,257Human Services$82,337

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFaith In Action Bay Area: $662,500 over 3y, 15% of budgetSAN DIEGO ORGANIZING PROJECT: $485,000 over 3y, 27% of budgetSACRAMENTO AREA CONGREGATIONS TOGETHER: $475,000 over 3y, 15% of budgetFAITH IN THE VALLEY: $462,500 over 2y, 16% of budgetLA VOICE: $420,000 over 2y, 8.8% of budgetFaith In Action East Bay: $414,930 over 3y, 30% of budgetInland Congregations United for Change Sponsoring Committee Inc: $405,000 over 3y, 4.7% of budgetPOWERCA ACTION FKA MOBILIZE THE IMMIGRANT VOTE ACTION: $312,904 over 2y, 19% of budgetPeople Acting in Community Together: $230,000 over 3y, 23% of budgetCALIFORNIA CALLS EDUCATION FUND: $225,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetTRUE NORTH ORGANIZING NETWORK: $220,000 over 3y, 6.0% of budgetCOALITION FOR HUMANE IMMIGRANT RIGHTS: $140,836 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetOC Action: $121,287 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetACCE Institute: $96,257 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetAlliance of Californians for Community Empowerment Action: $56,337 over 1y, 11% of budgetPOWER CALIFORNIA: $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCALIFORNIA BLACK POWER NETWORK: $50,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetLA VOICE ACTION: $45,000 over 1y, 91% of budgetCENTER FOR EMPOWERED POLITICS: $40,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetINNERCITY STRUGGLE: $26,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

The California Wellne…The San Francisco Fou…The California Endowm…The James Irvine Foun…Faith in Action Netwo…California Calls Educ…Liberty Hill Foundati…East Bay Community Fo…Sierra Health Foundat…Power CaliforniaCalifornia Community …Common Counsel Founda…
The California Wellness FoundationCA28.8× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The California Wellness Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · The California Endowment · The James Irvine Foundation · Faith in Action Network · California Calls Education Fund · Liberty Hill Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · Sierra Health Foundation Center for Health Program Management · Power California · California Community Foundation · Common Counsel Foundation

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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
    5report 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, FY20–24
    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 22 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.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on PICO California’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