· Public charity
Protect Democracy Project
The mission of PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT is to prevent our democracy from declining into a more authoritarian form of government.
Read this first · the figures below need context
82% of Protect Democracy Project’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 16 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Protect Democracy Project named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $320k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2022
- $10k–50k3 grants · $85k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $235k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WHISTLEBLOWER AID | $100,000 |
| RAINEY CENTER FREEDOM PROJECT | $85,000 |
| BUSINESS FOR AMERICA EDUCATION FUND | $50,000 |
| TEAM DEMOCRACY | $35,000 |
| KEYSTONE RESEARCH CENTER | $25,000 |
| THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NATIONAL SECURITY LEADERS | $25,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 99% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
6 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2022, 3 since wound down; 19 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 36% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $849k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- PDPROTECT DEMOCRACY UNITED2× · 2023–2024 · $690k · revenue +39%
- IAINTERFAITH AMERICA2× · 2023–2024 · $115k · revenue +62%
- BFBUSINESS FOR AMERICA EDUCATION FUND3× · 2022–2024 · $100k · revenue +6%
Funded once
- CFCoalition for Good Governanceone grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue -21% · 26% of their budget
- DDDEFENDING DEMOCRACY TOGETHER INSTITUTEgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +743%
- MWMormon Women For Ethical Government Foun dationgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +622%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. Pew Research Center generates a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue and…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
To educate journalists and the public, and foster public debate, about improving political journalism to reflect public needs and hold the powerful accountable.
Advocating for public policies that advance democratic values in the digital age.
The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.
Organize general election presidential and vice-presidential debates
To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…
The mission of voteamerica is to strengthen united states democracy by increasing voter turnout.
The center for popular democracy (cpd) and its affiliates know that everyday people have the power to change the world. we upend business and politics as usual to forge a representative, multiracial government and society where we all…
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…
Making our government work better is a daunting task, and we are a small organization seeking to transform a government that employs millions of civilians and manages trillions of dollars in taxpayer revenue needed to protect public…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Inc and the most unlike its peers is Team Democracy Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 12 years old; the field is 18. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 13% of your grantees by number, and just 8% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 6% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
33 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 33 of the 34 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds PROTECT DEMOCRACY UNITED ↗
- Who funds VALUES UNITED ↗
- Who funds RIGHTCOUNT INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Global Impact ↗
- Who funds INTERFAITH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds ISSUE ONE ↗
- Who funds Coalition for Good Governance ↗
- Who funds BUSINESS FOR AMERICA EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF MODERN AUTHORITARIANISM ↗
- Who funds JOSEPH RAINEY CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY ↗
- Who funds NORTH MAIN STREET FUND ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COLLEGE OF NATIONAL SECURITY LEADERS INC ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC DEMOCRACY AMERICA ↗
- Who funds LAW FORWARD INC ↗
- Who funds The Trustees of Princeton University ↗
- Who funds Team Democracy Inc ↗
- Who funds Sojourners Inc ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds TIDES ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds DEMOCRACY A JOURNAL OF IDEAS INC ↗
- Who funds Keystone Research Center Inc ↗
- Who funds DEFENDING DEMOCRACY TOGETHER INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds American Values Coalition ↗
- Who funds Mormon Women For Ethical Government Foun dation ↗
- Who funds HP ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds The George Washington University ↗
- Who funds THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION ↗
- Who funds CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR CHRISTIANITY AND PUBLIC LIFE ↗
- Who funds RepresentUs Education Fund ↗
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.
Open a dossier: The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Hopewell Fund · Democracy Fund Inc · New Venture Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Catena Foundation · Tides Foundation · Foundation to Promote Open Society · Impactassetsinc · Marin Community Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors 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 Protect Democracy Project 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.
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Protect Democracy Project?
Find your warmest path to Protect Democracy Project 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.