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

· Public charity

Powerpac Foundation

To promote civic engagement and voter participation in minority, low-income, and other historically underrepresented communities.

$185k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through 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, FY2020 to 2024.

Community Improvement$455kEnvironment$253kEducation$225kPublic Safety & Disaster$200kHuman Services$100kPublic Benefit$60kHousing & Shelter$30kCivil Rights$25k
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$30,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEV CORP$30,000
COMMUNITY HOUSING DEV CORP$30,000
MISSION ECONOMIC DEV AGENCY$30,000
THE UNITY COUNCIL$30,000
TENDERLOIN NEIGHBORHHOD DEV C$30,000
ARIZONA CENTER FOR EMPOWERMT$25,000
CENTER FOR CIVIC ENGAGEMENT$10,000
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 (FY20–20, $125k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, 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%SCOPE: $25k → 14%KEYS EMPOWERS INC: $100k → 11%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 14% of Powerpac Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Powerpac Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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
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
2
East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy

Ebase advances economic, racial and social justice by building a just economy in the east bay on good jobs and healthy communities. we address the root causes of economic injustice by developing strategic alliances amount community, faith…

Public Benefit
3
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
4
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
5
Chicago United for Equity

Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.

Civil Rights
6
Community Development Technologies Center

To build livable and economically viable communities in the low income areas of This is accomplished by Greater Los Angeles strengthening the skils and self-sufficiency of residents, businesses of residents, businesses and community…

Community Improvement
7
Unitedly

Unitedly is a nonprofit organization based in San Mateo County, California. Unitedly was established to ensure Asian families and communities have access to equitable opportunities and resources to thrive in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Human Services
8
Silicon Valley Rising Action

Silicon Valley Rising Action takes on occupational segregation and income inequality with a comprehensive campaign to raise wages, create affordable housing, and build a tech economy that works for everyone.

—
9
Mid-City Community Advocacy Network

Mid-city community advocacy network works to build a safe, productive, and healthy community for the residents of city heights and greater san diego through collaboration, advocacy, and organizing.

Community Improvement
10
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
11
Nuestra Casa de East Palo Alto

Nuestra Casa exists to uplift Latino families in East Palo Alto and the mid-peninsula through community education, leadership and advocacy

Human Services
12
Center for Community Advocacy

Provide Educational Programs, Health Services and Legal Services to Farm Workers at housing sites and throughout the Salinas Valley and promote improved living conditions.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chinatown Community Development Center; the most unlike its peers is Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

21 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. 21 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
10/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNITE HERE EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FUND: $250,000 · Community ImprovementUNITE HERE EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FUN…FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $100,000 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT…EAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $30,000 · Community ImprovementEAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT COR…SPANISH SPEAKING UNITY COUNCIL OF ALAMEDA COUNTY INC: $30,000 · Community ImprovementSPANISH SPEAKING UNITY COUNCIL OF AL…COMMUNITY COALITION FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT: $25,000 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY COALITION FOR SUBSTANCE AB…CASA INC: $100,000 · OtherCASA INCST JAMES P E CHURCH: $100,000 · OtherST JAMES P E CHURCHMISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY: $30,000 · OtherMISSION ECONOMIC DEVE…COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP OF NORTH RICHMOND: $30,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY HOUSING DEV…GAMMA BOULE FOUNDATION INC: $200,000 · EducationGAMMA BOULE FOUNDATIO…Evolve Mentoring: $25,000 · EducationEvolve MentoringCommunities For A New California Education Fund: $25,000 · EducationCommunities For A New…KEYS EMPOWERS INC: $100,000 · Human ServicesKEYS EMPOW…Strategic Concepts In Organizing & Policy Education: $25,000 · Human ServicesStrategic …BRIGHTLINE DEFENSE PROJECT: $65,000 · Civil RightsBRIGHTLINE…EQUALITY ALLIANCE OF SAN DIEGO: $25,000 · Civil RightsEQUALITY A…ARIZONA CENTER FOR EMPOWERMENT: $25,000 · Civil RightsARIZONA CE…CENTER ON CIVIC ENGAGEMENT: $10,000 · Civil RightsCENTER ON …CHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $73,000 · Housing & ShelterTENDERLOIN NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $30,000 · Housing & ShelterAsian Pacific Environmental Network: $25,000 · EnvironmentWorking Partnerships USA: $25,000 · Health
Community Improvement$435,000Other$260,000Education$250,000Human Services$125,000Civil Rights$125,000Housing & Shelter$103,000Environment$25,000Health$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 budgetUNITE HERE EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FUND: $250,000 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetCASA INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKEYS EMPOWERS INC: $100,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetCHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $73,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBRIGHTLINE DEFENSE PROJECT: $65,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetMISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTENDERLOIN NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSPANISH SPEAKING UNITY COUNCIL OF ALAMEDA COUNTY INC: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP OF NORTH RICHMOND: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAsian Pacific Environmental Network: $25,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEQUALITY ALLIANCE OF SAN DIEGO: $25,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetARIZONA CENTER FOR EMPOWERMENT: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCOMMUNITY COALITION FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetEvolve Mentoring: $25,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetWorking Partnerships USA: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCommunities For A New California Education Fund: $25,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetStrategic Concepts In Organizing & Policy Education: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCENTER ON CIVIC ENGAGEMENT: $10,000 over 1y, 2.4% 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 San Francisco Fou…Evelyn and Walter Haa…The California Endowm…United Way of the Bay…The James Irvine Foun…Enterprise Community …Silicon Valley Commun…East Bay Community Fo…Kaiser Foundation Hos…Amalgamated Charitabl…Loud Hound FoundationTipping Point Communi…
The San Francisco FoundationCA27.3× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The San Francisco Foundation · Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr Fund · The California Endowment · United Way of the Bay Area · The James Irvine Foundation · Enterprise Community Partners Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Loud Hound Foundation · Tipping Point Community

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 8%
  • Casa Inc: 8% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Powerpac Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Powerpac Foundation 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 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 Powerpac’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