Skip to content
Progressive Caucus Action Fund at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Progressive Caucus Action Fund

The PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS ACTION FUND ("the pcaf") is working across the progressive movement to unite stakeholders around common goals, build infrastructure, and secure real policy wins.

$10k
Granted FY2022
1
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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, FY2021 to 2022.

Public Benefit$50kCivil Rights$20kEducation$10kCommunity Improvement$10k
02FY2022 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$4.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ONE AMERICA VOTES$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–21) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 75% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%TAKEACTION MINNESOTA ED FUND: $10k → 14%NEO PHILANTHROPY (NBWC): $10k → 17%MOTHERING JUSTICE: $10k → 21%NEW GEORGIA PROJECT: $10k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR A JUST SOCIETY: $10k → 9%WEST VIRGINIA CITIZENS ACTION GROUP: $10k → 18%THE PEOPLE'S LOBBY: $10k → 14%RIGHTS & DEMOCRACY INSTITUTE: $10k → 10%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

VT
WA
MN
IL
MI
NY
WV
GA
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 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
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
2
One for Democracy Action Fund

One for democracy unlocks resources to build a healthy democracy by fostering meaningful relationships between philanthropists and the democracy leaders of our time.

—
3
Powerswitch Action

Powerswitch action is a national network forging collective democracy and economies in our cities and states, together with our 21 grassroots affiliates.

Community Improvement
4
New Jersey Citizen Action

To protect and expand the rights of citizens of the state of new jersey, and encourage active citizen involvement in campaigns promoting economic, social and racial equity.

—
5
Alliance for Justice

Alliance for justice builds the strength of progressive movements by training and educating nonprofit organizations on advocacy, while harnessing their collective power to transform our state and federal courts.

Civil Rights
6
Right to Democracy Action

Advance democracy, equity, and self-determination in u.s. territories, including by promoting civic engagement among the territorial diaspora throughout the united states.

—
7
League of Women Voters of New Jersey

Through grassroots people-powered advocacy and organizing, lwvnj trains, mobilizes, and educates advocates to have a greater voice in government and influence public policy.

—
8
League of Women Voters of New Jersey Education Fund

Lwvnj-ef's nonpartisan voter education and voter protection work ensures everyone has the tools, resources, and confidence they need to participate fully at the ballot box and beyond.

Civil Rights
9
Fund for Justice

Fund for Justice is a nationally connected social impact research and advocacy organization that works to achieve fundamental, systemic reform by addressing policies and practicies that prevent individuals from reaching their full…

Crime & Legal
10
Fair Democracy

Fair democracy works to ensure that the roots of american democracy are healthy with strong voting rights and access, an engaged and informed electorate, an open and accountable government and trusted messengers engaging americans in civil…

Civil Rights
11
Change Illinois Action Fund

Change illinois action fund is dedicated to advocating for solutions to the issues that undermine democracy and government efficiency in illinois, including restricted ballot access, uncompetitive elections, decreased citizen…

—
12
New American Leaders Action Fund Inc

New american leaders action fund (nalaf) is building a democracy that represents and includes all people by engaging new voters, supporting new americans as they run for office, and expanding civic engagement.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rights & Democracy Education Fund Inc; the most unlike its peers is Alliance for a Just Society. 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

9 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.

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

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE PEOPLE'S LOBBY: $10,000 · OtherTHE PEOPLE'S LOBBYNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND: $10,000 · OtherNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUNDWEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION GROUP: $10,000 · OtherWEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION GROUPTAKEACTION MN EDUCATION FUND: $10,000 · Public BenefitTAKEACTION MN EDUCATION F…NEO Philanthropy Inc: $10,000 · Public BenefitNEO Philanthropy IncMOTHERING JUSTICE: $10,000 · Civil RightsMOTHERING JUSTICEONEAMERICA VOTES: $10,000 · Civil RightsONEAMERICA VOTESRIGHTS & DEMOCRACY EDUCATION FUND INC: $10,000 · Crime & LegalRIGHTS & DEM…ALLIANCE FOR A JUST SOCIETY: $10,000 · Community ImprovementALLIANCE FOR…
Other$30,000Public Benefit$20,000Civil Rights$20,000Crime & Legal$10,000Community Improvement$10,000

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 budgetTAKEACTION MN EDUCATION FUND: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMOTHERING JUSTICE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE PEOPLE'S LOBBY: $10,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetRIGHTS & DEMOCRACY EDUCATION FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetALLIANCE FOR A JUST SOCIETY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetONEAMERICA VOTES: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA CITIZEN ACTION GROUP: $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Proteus Action League
Proteus Action LeagueMA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Proteus Action League

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 Progressive Caucus Action Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Progressive Caucus Action Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%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
    1get no government money at all
    2report 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 9 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Progressive Caucus Action’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