Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Planned Parenthood Advocates Mar Monte Inc

To advocate for reproductive health and rights by educating policy makers and the public, and to elect candidates that support access to reproductive health care by identifying, educating, and mobilizing voters.

$59k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$59k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 76% of PLANNED PARENTHOOD ADVOCATES MAR MONTE INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$59,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EQUALITY CALIFORNIA ISSUES PAC$59,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 67% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CALIFORNIA SAFETY NET COALITION DBA COALITION TO PROTECT ACCESS TO HEALTHCA: $214k → 8%YES ON PROPOSITION 1 - PROTECTING CHOICE IN CALIFORNIA A PROJECT OF PPAC: $250k → 12%EQUALITY CALIFORNIA ISSUES PAC: $59k → 14%REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM IN NEVADA: $250k → 14%FLORIDIANS PROTECTING FREEDOM INC: $50k → 15%REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL COMMITTEE: $50k → 21%KANSANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM INC: $50k → 5%OHIOANS FOR REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM: $50k → 15%PLANNED PARENTHOOD ALLIANCE ADVOCATES SERVING AKHIIDINKY AND WA: $50k → 9%VERMONT FOR REPRODUCTIVE LIBERTY BALLOT COMMITTEE: $50k → 10%NEVADANS FOR EQUAL RIGHTS: $20k → 14%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

VT
WA
MI
OH
CA
KS
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 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
Ohioans United for Reproductive Rights

Ballot issue political action committee in the State of Ohio to advocate for the passage of a constitutional amendment to protect reproductive rights.

2
Nebraskans for Reproductive Freedom

The Protect Our Right Coalition has been created to develop, qualify for the 2024 general election, and pass a constitutional amendment to secure the right to abortion for Nebraskans.

Civil Rights
3
Protect Women Ohio Action Inc

Protect Women Ohio Action is a Section 501(c)(4) social welfare organization and registered ballot committee in the State of Ohio engaged in advocacy activities related to the "Right to Reproductive Freedom with Protections for Health and…

4
One Person One Vote

Ballot issue political action committee to advocate for the defeat of a constitutional amendment that would require a 60% threshold for any future constitutional amendments.

5
Protect Colorados Vote

To oppose a colorado statewide ballot initiative to join the national popular vote compact

6
MEN4CHOICE Advocacy

Mobile Male Allies in the Fight for Reproductive Freedoms

Civil Rights
7
Yes On National Popular Vote

Support "yes" vote on referendum dealing with national popular vote

8
Equal Rights for All Petition

Amends Constitution: Specifies that prohibited discrimination includes discrimination concerning gender identity/pregnancy, related health decisions, sexual orientation

9
Defend Your Vote

To oppose a Michigan ballot measure

10
Nonpartisan Healthcare Coalition Broken Healthcare Action Fund

Issue Committee to sponsor a ballet measure for cost transparency

11
Coloradans for Protecting Reproductive Freedom

To support a constitutional amendment protecting reproductive freedom in colorado.

12
Mayor Breed's Committee for Reproductive Freedom

Ballot measure committee supporting Measure O: San Francisco Reproductive Freedom Act

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom and the most unlike its peers is Ohioans for Reproductive Freedom Pac. 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

10 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 11 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/10
Grantees still filing
1/10
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

NEVADANS FOR REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM — $250,000 · OtherNEVADANS FOR REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOMYES ON PROPOSITION 1 - PROTECTING CHOICE IN CALIFORNIA A PROJECT OF PPAC — $250,000 · OtherYES ON PROPOSITION 1 - PROTECTING CHOICE IN CALIFORNIA A PROJECT OF PPACEquality California Issues PAC — $59,000 · OtherEquality California Issues PACOhioans for Reproductive Freedom PAC — $50,000 · OtherOhioans for Reproductive Freedom PACREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL — $50,000 · OtherREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALLFLORIDIANS PROTECTING FREEDOM — $50,000 · OtherFLORIDIANS PROTECTING FREEDOMKANSANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM INC — $50,000 · OtherKANSANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM INCVERMONT FOR REPRODUCTIVE LIBERTY BALLOT COMMITTEE INC — $50,000 · OtherVERMONT FOR REPRODUCTIVE LIBERTY BALLOT COMMITTEE INC+1 more — $20,000 · OtherProtect Our Healthcare — $214,482 · Public BenefitProtect Our HealthcarePLANNED PARENTHOOD ALLIANCE ADVOCATES SERVING AK HI ID IN KY AND WA — $50,000 · Health
Other$829,000Public Benefit$214,482Health$50,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNEVADANS FOR REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM — $250,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetProtect Our Healthcare — $214,482 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD ALLIANCE ADVOCATES SERVING AK HI ID IN KY AND WA — $50,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetFLORIDIANS PROTECTING FREEDOM — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKANSANS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOM INC — $50,000 over 1y, 39% of budgetNevadans for Equal Rights — $20,000 over 1y, 7.9% 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.

Community Action Fund of Planned Parenthood Orange & San BernardinoCA20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Action Fund of Planned Parenthood Orange & San Bernardino · Planned Parenthood Action Fund Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest · American Civil Liberties Union Inc · Advocacy Action Fund 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 Planned Parenthood Advocates Mar Monte Inc 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.

2023
21222324
no gov · 00%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
    0get 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, FY2124

    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.

    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Planned Parenthood Advocates Mar Monte Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Planned Parenthood Advocates Mar Monte Inc 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 11 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph