Skip to content
Protect Democracy United at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Protect Democracy United

The mission of PROTECT DEMOCRACY UNITED is to prevent our democracy from declining into a more authoritarian form of government.

$2.0M
Granted FY2024still arriving
18
Grants FY2024still arriving
9
States reached
$1.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through 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.

Public Benefit$3.6MCivil Rights$715kHuman Services$300kEnvironment$190kCommunity Improvement$50kInternational$33kSocial Science$25kArts & Culture$15k
02FY2024 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $155k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $517k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.3M
$60,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DEFENDING DEMOCRACY TOGETHER$1,000,000
WORKMONEY INC$300,000
SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND$150,000
SECURE DEMOCRACY USA$67,000
WE VOTE WE WIN$60,000
COUNT MI VOTE DBAVOTERS NOT POLITICIANS$60,000
PROMOTE THE VOTE PA$60,000
LEADERSHIP NOW PROJECT$60,000
MAKE NC FIRST$60,000
POWER TO THE POLLS$30,000
AMERICA VOTES$30,000
SECURE FAMILIES INITIATIVE$25,000
RURAL ARIZONA ACTION$15,000
FUERTE ARTS MOVEMENT$15,000
LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA$15,000
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 (FY22–24, $43k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 53% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $15k → 11%ATLAS STRATEGY GROUP: $8k → 28%MORMON WOMEN FOR ETHICAL GOVERNMENT: $20k → 8%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

WI
MI
NY
PA
UT
VA
MD
AZ
NC
DC
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

40%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 3 repeat orgs$2.7M to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
8

Total granted

$1.7M
$1.9M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-50%
+13%

Still filing today

67%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $770k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementSocial SciencePublic BenefitInternationalOther
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

  • DD
    DEFENDING DEMOCRACY TOGETHER
    3× · 2020–2024 · $1.1M · revenue -50%
  • SD
    Secure Democracy
    2× · 2020–2021 · $494k · revenue -100%
  • LN
    LEADERSHIP NOW PROJECT
    2× · 2022–2024 · $110k · revenue +40%

Funded once

  • RA
    RIGHTCOUNT ACTION INC
    one grant, 2023 · $1.1M · 84% of their budget
  • AU
    AMERICAN UNITY FUND INC
    one grant, 2022 · $610k · revenue -54%
  • IO
    ISSUE ONE ACTIONgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $65k · revenue +144%
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
Right Vote Inc
Civil Rights
2
Keystone Democracy

Keystone Democracy's goal is to ensure that all Pennsylvania elections are implemented in a safe, secure, convenient and fair manner. We work to advance pro-democracy policies by informing elected officials, civic leaders, the media, and…

—
3
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
4
RepresentUs

RepresentUs is America's leading nonpartisan grassroots organization working for a government accountable to the people. We unite people from all backgrounds to defend democracy, root out corruption, mobilize action, and support campaigns…

Public Benefit
5
Democracy Works Inc

The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.

Civil Rights
6
Democracyfirst

Democracyfirst is a 501(c)4 dedicated to restoring public trust in the electoral system, protecting free and fair elections, and renewing the pro-democracy consensus in american politics.

—
7
Register America

The organization is founded for social welfare purposes, including assisting with voter registration and advocating for policies which lead to increased voter registration in the united states.

—
8
Election Watch Inc

Research analyze publish information to public on elections election systems laws and campaign financing.

Civil Rights
9
Coalition for Dc Representation in Congress Education Fund

Founded in 1998, dc vote is a national citizen engagement and advocacy organization dedicated to strengthening democracy and securing equality for all in the district of columbia.

Education
10
Secure Election Project Inc

To preserve and protect the sanctity of our vote by promoting commonsense, nonpartisan election security reforms that prevent hacking and fraud without restricting eligible citizens from accessing the polls.

Public Benefit
11
All Americans Vote

All Americans Vote aims to motivate underrepresented Americans to engage in the most patriotic of exercises - voting!

Civil Rights
12
Send the Vote Inc

Conduct digital, direct mail and other public communication campaigns to support voter registration and get-out-the-vote efforts.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rightcount Action Inc; the most unlike its peers is Fuerte Arts Movement. 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

28 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/28
Grantees still filing
8/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DEFENDING DEMOCRACY TOGETHER: $1,145,000 · OtherDEFENDING DEMOCRACY TOGETHERRIGHTCOUNT ACTION INC: $1,075,000 · OtherRIGHTCOUNT ACTION INCAMERICAN UNITY FUND INC: $610,000 · OtherAMERICAN UNITY FUND INCSecure Democracy: $493,730 · OtherSecure DemocracyWORKMONEY INC: $300,000 · OtherWORKMONEY INC+6 more: $325,000 · Other+6 moreNORTH FUND: $287,500 · Public BenefitCOUNT MI VOTE EDUCATION FUND: $60,000 · Public BenefitSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $190,000 · EnvironmentSecure Democracy USA: $67,000 · Civil RightsPOWER TO THE POLLS INC: $30,000 · Civil RightsRURAL ARIZONA ACTION: $15,000 · Civil RightsPROGRESS ARIZONA: $15,000 · Civil RightsFuerte Arts Movement: $15,000 · Civil RightsPRINCIPLES FIRST FOR AMERICA FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · Civil RightsPROMOTE THE VOTE PA: $60,000 · Human ServicesMormon Women For Ethical Government: $20,000 · Human ServicesLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $15,000 · Human ServicesATLAS STRATEGIES INTERNATIONAL INC: $7,500 · Human ServicesWe Vote We Win: $60,000 · Community ImprovementAmerica Votes: $30,000 · Community ImprovementSECURE FAMILIES INITIATIVE: $25,000 · InternationalKeystone Research Center Inc: $25,000 · Social Science
Other$3,948,730Public Benefit$347,500Environment$190,000Civil Rights$152,000Human Services$102,500Community Improvement$90,000International$25,000Social Science$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 budgetDEFENDING DEMOCRACY TOGETHER: $1,145,000 over 3y, 5.3% of budgetRIGHTCOUNT ACTION INC: $1,075,000 over 1y, 84% of budgetAMERICAN UNITY FUND INC: $610,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetSecure Democracy: $493,730 over 2y, 6.8% of budgetWORKMONEY INC: $300,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNORTH FUND: $287,500 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSIXTEEN THIRTY FUND: $190,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLEADERSHIP NOW PROJECT: $110,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetSecure Democracy USA: $67,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetISSUE ONE ACTION: $65,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetCOUNT MI VOTE EDUCATION FUND: $60,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetPROMOTE THE VOTE PA: $60,000 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetMake North Carolina First: $60,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWe Vote We Win: $60,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetBLACK ECONOMIC ALLIANCE: $50,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetAmerica Votes: $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPOWER TO THE POLLS INC: $30,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetSECURE FAMILIES INITIATIVE: $25,000 over 1y, 9.9% of budgetKeystone Research Center Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCOMMON CAUSE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMormon Women For Ethical Government: $20,000 over 1y, 8.3% of budgetRURAL ARIZONA ACTION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetRAINEY CENTER FREEDOM PROJECT: $15,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetPROGRESS ARIZONA: $15,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetFuerte Arts Movement: $15,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetPRINCIPLES FIRST FOR AMERICA FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.2% 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 FundDemocracy Fund Voice …Way to Win Action Fun…Tides AdvocacyGrove Action FundNorth FundAmerica VotesOpen Society Action F…Our American Future A…All Hands on Deck Net…Hopewell FundFuse Washington
Sixteen Thirty FundDC25.2× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · Democracy Fund Voice Inc · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Tides Advocacy · Grove Action Fund · North Fund · America Votes · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Our American Future Action · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Hopewell Fund · Fuse Washington

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%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
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Protect Democracy United?

    Find your warmest path to Protect Democracy United 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 28 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 Protect Democracy United’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