Skip to content
Progress Now Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Progress Now Inc

To support partner organizations at the state level in providing a strong credible voice in advancing progressive solutions to critical community issues.

$7.7M
Granted FY2024still arriving
19
Grants FY2024still arriving
14
States reached
$1.7M
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Public Benefit$13MCivil Rights$120kArts & Culture$14k
02FY2024 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $22k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $1.1M
  • $250k+10 grants · $6.5M
$250,000
Median grant
14
States reached
$3.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PROGRESS NC ACTION$1,736,000
A BETTER WISCONSIN TOGETHER$1,025,000
PROGRESS NOW AZ$782,200
COMMONWEALTH COMMS$772,000
PROGRESS MICHIGAN$675,000
BATTLE BORN PROGRESS (NV)$375,000
PROGRESS MICHIGAN PAC$350,000
NEBRASKA CONNECTING THE DOTS$300,000
INNOVATION OHIO$276,500
PEOPLE POWER PENNSYLVANIA$250,000
MILLIONS OF MICHIGANIANS$220,000
PROGRESS IOWA$207,670
PROGRESS GEORGIA$200,000
MIDDLE FORK STRATEGIES$155,000
PROGRESS VIRGINIA$126,140
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 96% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%PROGRESS NOW AZ: $782k → 11%ALLIANCE FOR A BETTER MINNESOTA: $200k → 14%COMMONWEALTH COMMS: $772k → 22%TIDES FOUNDATION: $50k → 10%PROGRESS TEXAS: $55k → 10%AMERICANS FOR DEMOCRATIC ACTION: $73k → 14%IOWA CITIZEN ACTION NETWORK: $30k → 15%PROGRESS MICHIGAN: $675k → 16%A BETTER WISCONSIN TOGETHER: $1.0M → 10%PROGRESS GEORGIA: $450k → 14%INNOVATION OHIO: $450k → 15%PROGRESS VIRGINIA: $126k → 8%BATTLE BORN PROGRESS (NV): $375k → 13%PROGRESS ARIZONA: $150k → 11%ALLIANCE FOR A BETTER MINNESOTA: $100k → 14%COMMONWEALTH COMMUNICATIONS: $478k → 22%PROGRESS TEXAS: $25k → 10%SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $34k → 14%PROGRESS IOWA: $208k → 10%IOWA CITIZEN ACTION NETWORK: $23k → 15%PROGRESS NOW EDUCATION: $407k → 16%ONE WISCONSIN NOW: $75k → 10%PROGRESS GEORGIA: $200k → 14%INNOVATION OHIO: $277k → 15%ADVANCE MARYLAND: $50k → 8%BATTLE BORN PROGRESS: $153k → 13%ALLIANCE FOR A BETTER MINNESOTA: $78k → 14%PROGRESS TEXAS: $25k → 10%PROGRESS IOWA: $25k → 10%PROGRESS MICHIGAN PAC: $350k → 16%ALLIANCE FOR A BETTER WI TOGETHER: $250k → 10%PROGRESS GEORGIA: $50k → 14%BATTLE BORN PROGRESS: $25k → 13%PROGRESS TEXAS: $25k → 10%IOWA CITIZEN ACTION NETWORK: $22k → 10%PROGRESS NOW EDUCATION: $224k → 16%ONE WISCONSIN NOW: $50k → 10%BATTLE BORN PROGRESS: $25k → 13%MILLIONS OF MICHIGANIANS: $220k → 16%A BETTER WISCONSIN: $50k → 10%BATTLE BORN PROGRESS: $25k → 13%PROGRESS MICHIGAN: $200k → 16%BATTLE BORN PROGRESS: $25k → 13%PROGRESS NOW EDUCATION: $88k → 16%PROGRESS MICHIGAN: $78k → 16%PROGRESS MICHIGAN: $50k → 16%PROGRESS MICHIGAN: $40k → 16%PROGRESS MICHIGAN: $25k → 16%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
ID
MT
MN
WI
MI
NY
NV
IA
OH
PA
CA
NE
VA
AZ
NM
TN
NC
DC
GA
TX
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$11M · 17 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

17 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
6

Total granted

$11M
$94k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+28%

Still filing today

82%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $968k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesReligionEnvironmentOther
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

  • PN
    PROGRESS NORTH CAROLINA ACTION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $2.0M · revenue ×55 · 26% of their budget
  • PM
    Progress Michigan Inc
    6× · 2019–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +274%
  • AB
    A BETTER WISCONSIN TOGETHER INC
    3× · 2021–2024 · $1.3M · revenue +269%

Funded once

  • IA
    INTERFAITH ALLIANCE OF IOWAgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +48%
  • VI
    VOTES IDAHO COMPANYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +130%
  • FW
    Fuse Washington
    one grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue -36%
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
Progressnow Colorado

To promote citizen engagement in the formation of public policy

Education
2
Tennessee Progress

Tennessee progress works to uplift the values and voices of the progressive movement across tennessee by elevating the issues that matter most to our communities. tennessee progress is a digital and communications hub for the progressive…

—
3
Progress Texas Institute

The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.

Civil Rights
4
Progress Michigan Education Inc

Progress Michigan Education is a non-partisan, nonprofit 501(c)3 organization that promotes solutions for michigan through independent research, public education and the use of new media and internet outreach campaigns.

Public Benefit
5
Wisconsin Progress Inc

Wisconsin progress recruits, trains, elects, and develops progressive candidates and leaders at the local and state legislative levels.

Civil Rights
6
Progressnow Colorado Education

To provide a strong credible voice in advancing progressive solutions to critical community issues

Community Improvement
7
Progress North Carolina

Progress North Carolina conducts research, sponsors educational activities and events, and disseminates accurate and timely information to promote the general public's understanding of ways to maintain and improve North Carolina's common…

Community Improvement
8
Institute for Public Accuracy

To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.

Arts & Culture
9
Progress Mo

Progress mo is a multi-issue advocacy organization focused on advancing progressive issues through communication. our mission is to provide a strong, credible voice in advancing progressive solutions to critical community problems.

Civil Rights
10
People's Independent Commission

Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay

—
11
Washington Progress Fund

Washington Progress Fund is building a permanent and powerful social change movement in Washington state supported by a network of committed donors. WPF envisions a Washington state where government serves the public interest and we all…

Philanthropy
12
New Progressive Network

Next up amplifies the voice of diverse youth to achieve a more just oregon

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Progress Arizona; the most unlike its peers is Americans for Democratic Action Inc. 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

25 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. 25 of the 30 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.

8
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/25
Grantees still filing
13/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMONWEALTH COMMUNICATIONS: $1,250,000 · OtherCOMMONWEALTH COMMUNICATIONSInnovation Ohio: $726,500 · OtherInnovation OhioPROGRESS NOW EDUCATION: $719,551 · OtherPROGRESS NOW EDUCATIONPROGRESS IOWA: $672,670 · OtherPROGRESS IOWACONNECTING THE DOTS INC: $300,000 · OtherCONNECTING THE DOTS INCPEOPLE POWER PENNSYLVANIA: $250,000 · OtherPEOPLE POWER PENNSYLVANIAMILLIONS OF MICHIGANIANS: $220,000 · Other+6 more: $278,036 · Other+6 morePROGRESS NORTH CAROLINA ACTION: $1,986,000 · Public BenefitPROGRESS NORTH CAROLINA ACTIONProgress Michigan Inc: $1,418,000 · Public BenefitProgress Michigan Inc+1 more: $92,500 · Public BenefitA BETTER WISCONSIN TOGETHER INC: $1,325,000 · Civil RightsA BETTER WISCONSIN TOGETHER I…PROGRESS ARIZONA: $942,200 · Civil RightsPROGRESS ARIZONAProgress Georgia Inc: $700,000 · Civil RightsProgress Georgia IncPROGRESS NOW INC: $176,140 · Civil RightsPROGRESS NOW INCProgress Texas: $130,000 · Civil Rights+1 more: $10,000 · Civil RightsBATTLE BORN PROGRESS: $628,000 · Community ImprovementBATTLE BO…Alliance for a Better Minnesota: $378,000 · Community ImprovementAlliance …+1 more: $15,000 · Community ImprovementMIDDLE FORK STRATEGIES INC: $305,000 · Human ServicesTIDES FOUNDATION: $50,000 · PhilanthropySIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $33,750 · EnvironmentFuse Washington: $15,000 · EnvironmentINTERFAITH ALLIANCE OF IOWA: $20,000 · Religion
Other$4,416,757Public Benefit$3,496,500Civil Rights$3,283,340Community Improvement$1,021,000Human Services$305,000Philanthropy$50,000Environment$48,750Religion$20,000

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 budgetPROGRESS NORTH CAROLINA ACTION: $1,986,000 over 4y, 26% of budgetProgress Michigan Inc: $1,418,000 over 6y, 23% of budgetA BETTER WISCONSIN TOGETHER INC: $1,325,000 over 3y, 22% of budgetCOMMONWEALTH COMMUNICATIONS: $1,250,000 over 2y, 22% of budgetPROGRESS ARIZONA: $942,200 over 3y, 31% of budgetInnovation Ohio: $726,500 over 2y, 53% of budgetPROGRESS NOW EDUCATION: $719,551 over 3y, 32% of budgetProgress Georgia Inc: $700,000 over 3y, 21% of budgetPROGRESS IOWA: $672,670 over 6y, 73% of budgetBATTLE BORN PROGRESS: $628,000 over 6y, 39% of budgetAlliance for a Better Minnesota: $378,000 over 3y, 28% of budgetMIDDLE FORK STRATEGIES INC: $305,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetPROGRESS NOW INC: $176,140 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetProgress Texas: $130,000 over 4y, 14% of budgetONE WISCONSIN NOW INC: $125,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetIOWA CITIZEN ACTION NETWORK EDUC FOUNDATION: $77,500 over 4y, 43% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $33,750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIOWA CITIZEN ACTION NETWORK: $22,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetINTERFAITH ALLIANCE OF IOWA: $20,000 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetFuse Washington: $15,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetFORWARD TN: $15,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetPROGRESSNOW NEW MEXICO: $10,000 over 1y, 2.0% 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.

Sixteen Thirty FundStrategic Victory FundNorth FundAmerica VotesHopewell FundTides FoundationWay to Win Action Fun…State Engagement FundAmerican Federation o…Progress Now EducationGrove Action FundWomen Donors Network …
Sixteen Thirty FundDC35.3× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Strategic Victory Fund · North Fund · America Votes · Hopewell Fund · Tides Foundation · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · State Engagement Fund · American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees · Progress Now Education · Grove Action Fund · Women Donors Network Action

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%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
    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
    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 30 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 Progress Now’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