Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Public Wise Inc

To secure a government that reflects the will and protects the rights of the people.

$1.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
27
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.

Public Benefit$3.6MCivil Rights$1.9MRecreation & Sports$550kCommunity Improvement$354kEnvironment$125kCrime & Legal$100kHuman Services$75kEducation$50kOther$0
02FY2024 · 27 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 27 grants below total $1,276,293 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,377,552 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $101,259 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k12 grants · $285k
  • $50k–250k15 grants · $991k
$50,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$3.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL REDISTRICTING ACTION FUND$150,000
PROGRESS NORTH CAROLINA ACTION$115,000
AMERICA VOTES$101,293
MI FAMILIA VOTA$75,000
LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTES INC$50,000
ASIAN AMERICAN ADVOCACY FUND INC$50,000
NCAAT in Action$50,000
VOTE REV ACTION FUND$50,000
ORGANIZE PENNSYLVANIA$50,000
DOWN HOME NORTH CAROLINA INC$50,000
RURAL ARIZONA ACTION$50,000
SHERIFFS FOR TRUSTING COMMUNITIES$50,000
OUR VOICE OUR VOTE$50,000
LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA$50,000
SIEMBRA NC GREENSBORO$50,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY24–24, $100k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 50% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%NCAAT in Action: $50k → 8%LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA: $50k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
PA
CA
MO
VA
MD
AZ
NC
DC
GA
TX

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

56%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$3.8M · 23 repeat orgs$2.9M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +85% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.

23 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

23
33

Total granted

$3.8M
$2.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+85%
+13%

Still filing today

87%
82%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $350k 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 RightsPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesEducationInternationalOther

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

  • TA
    TIDES ADVOCACY
    4× · 2021–2024 · $225k · revenue +18%
  • SA
    SHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION
    3× · 2020–2024 · $224k · revenue +109%
  • MF
    MI FAMILIA VOTA
    3× · 2022–2024 · $175k · revenue +7%

Funded once

  • PW
    PUBLIC WISE PAC
    one grant, 2022 · $400k
  • WT
    WAY TO WIN ACTION FUND INC
    one grant, 2020 · $250k · revenue +0%
  • FF
    FAIR FIGHT ACTION INC
    one grant, 2020 · $200k · revenue -88%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Democracy Works Inc

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

Civil Rights
2
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
3
Defend the Vote Action Fund

To sustain and support the prioritization of comprehensive voting rights and democracy reform legislation at all levels of government.

—
4
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
5
All Americans Vote

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

Civil Rights
6
Voteamerica

The mission of voteamerica is to strengthen united states democracy by increasing voter turnout.

Civil Rights
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
Network for Civic Action

Network for civic action advocates for the protection of democracy and encourages civic engagement. it evaluates programs and educates donors about how their donations can best serve those goals.

—
9
Send the Vote Inc

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

—
10
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.

—
11
Right Vote Inc
Civil Rights
12
The Campaign Legal Center Inc

The nonpartisan campaign legal center advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every american's rights to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic…

Crime & Legal

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Advance Democracy Inc and the most unlike its peers is Instituto Power. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyImmigrant Worker SupportVolunteer Fire & Ems Servic…Military Veterans SupportWomen & Girls Leadership De…Environmental Conservation …Youth Development ServicesPolicy Research and Advocacy
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 8 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%15%<5yr14%46%5–10yr19%19%10–20yr16%15%20–35yr13%4%35–55yr16%2%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%9%<5yr14%47%5–10yr19%24%10–20yr16%15%20–35yr13%3%35–55yr16%3%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 15% of your grantees by number, and just 9% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 6% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
6%
4/66
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,499

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.

04the grantee network

60 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. 60 of the 66 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
16
Early backer (in before they grew)
56/60
Grantees still filing
35/60
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

NATIONAL REDISTRICTING ACTION FUND — $525,000 · Civil RightsNATIONAL REDISTRICTING ACTION FUNDWAY TO WIN ACTION FUND INC — $250,000 · Civil RightsWAY TO WIN ACTION FUND INCMI FAMILIA VOTA — $175,000 · Civil RightsMI FAMILIA VOTAFREE SPEECH FOR PEOPLE INC — $125,000 · Civil RightsBLACK MALE VOTER PROJECT EF INC — $125,000 · Civil RightsCare in Action Inc — $125,000 · Civil RightsRURAL ARIZONA ACTION — $100,000 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $100,000 · Civil RightsWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC — $100,000 · Civil RightsORGANIZE PENNSYLVANIA — $100,000 · Civil Rights+23 more — $1,034,669 · Civil Rights+23 moreWAY TO WIN — $550,000 · OtherWAY TO WINPUBLIC WISE PAC — $400,000 · OtherPUBLIC WISE PACTIDES ADVOCACY — $225,000 · OtherTIDES ADVOCACYNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND — $175,000 · OtherNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUNDCOMMON CAUSE — $150,000 · OtherCOMMON CAUSEFIGHT FOR THE BASE — $150,000 · OtherFIGHT FOR THE BASEBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc — $115,000 · OtherBlack Voters Matter Fund IncSTATE DEMOCRACY ACTION — $75,000 · Other+7 more — $295,000 · Other+7 moreAmerica Votes — $352,268 · Community ImprovementAmerica Vo…SHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION — $224,000 · Community ImprovementSHERIFF AC…THE WATERSHED CENTER INC — $80,000 · Community ImprovementTHE WATERS…DEMOS A NETWORK FOR IDEAS AND ACTION LTD — $150,000 · Public BenefitDEMOS A NE…PROGRESS NORTH CAROLINA ACTION — $115,000 · Public BenefitPROGRESS N…NORTH FUND — $100,000 · Public BenefitNORTH FUNDCOMMON DEFENSE CIVIC ENGAGEMENT INC — $75,000 · Public BenefitCOMMON DEF…CENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ACTION — $75,000 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR…Center for Common Ground — $50,000 · Public BenefitCenter for…CAMPAIGN FOR ACCOUNTABILITY INC — $50,000 · Public BenefitCAMPAIGN F…Instituto Power — $25,000 · Public BenefitDOWN HOME NC — $150,000 · Human ServicesNCAAT IN ACTION — $75,000 · Human ServicesLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA — $50,000 · Human ServicesFAIR FIGHT ACTION INC — $200,000 · EducationWILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC — $50,000 · EducationADVANCE DEMOCRACY INC — $75,000 · InternationalMICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $25,000 · Environment
Civil Rights$2,759,669Other$2,135,000Community Improvement$656,268Public Benefit$640,000Human Services$275,000Education$250,000International$75,000Environment$25,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNATIONAL REDISTRICTING ACTION FUND — $525,000 over 4y, 2.9% of budgetAmerica Votes — $352,268 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetWAY TO WIN ACTION FUND INC — $250,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY — $225,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetSHERIFF ACCOUNTABILITY ACTION — $224,000 over 3y, 7.2% of budgetFAIR FIGHT ACTION INC — $200,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMI FAMILIA VOTA — $175,000 over 3y, 3.8% of budgetNEW GEORGIA PROJECT ACTION FUND — $175,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetDOWN HOME NC — $150,000 over 3y, 2.8% of budgetDEMOS A NETWORK FOR IDEAS AND ACTION LTD — $150,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetCOMMON CAUSE — $150,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetFREE SPEECH FOR PEOPLE INC — $125,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetBLACK MALE VOTER PROJECT EF INC — $125,000 over 2y, 34% of budgetCare in Action Inc — $125,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetPROGRESS NORTH CAROLINA ACTION — $115,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc — $115,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetRURAL ARIZONA ACTION — $100,000 over 2y, 5.5% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $100,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC — $100,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetORGANIZE PENNSYLVANIA — $100,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetNORTH FUND — $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetASIAN AMERICAN ADVOCACY FUND INC — $85,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetTHE WATERSHED CENTER INC — $80,000 over 2y, 8.9% of budgetENTERTAIN IMPACT ADVOCACY ALLIANCE INC — $75,000 over 3y, 37% of budgetSTATE DEMOCRACY ACTION — $75,000 over 1y, 46% of budgetCOMMON DEFENSE CIVIC ENGAGEMENT INC — $75,000 over 2y, 9.9% of budgetNCAAT IN ACTION — $75,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetAMERICAN OVERSIGHT INC — $75,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetADVANCE DEMOCRACY INC — $75,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetCENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE ACTION — $75,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetVOTE REV ACTION FUND — $65,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetBLACK MEN VOTE CIVIC ACTION FUND — $55,000 over 1y, 82% of budgetPROMOTE THE VOTE FUND INC — $50,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetARIZONA ADVOCACY NETWORK — $50,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetCenter for Common Ground — $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetACCOUNTABLEUS — $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetSIEMBRA NC — $50,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetLIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA — $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetVOTEORG — $50,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetVOTER FORMATION PROJECT — $50,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetBLACK GIRLS VOTE 4 HER INC — $50,000 over 1y, 8.0% of budgetCAMPAIGN FOR ACCOUNTABILITY INC — $50,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetDemocracy North Carolina — $50,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetWILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetADRC ACTION — $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetDrag Out the Vote — $50,000 over 1y, 41% of budgetARIZONA WINS — $25,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetMICHIGAN LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budget
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.

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.

Sixteen Thirty FundAmerica VotesWay to Win Action Fun…Open Society Action F…Tides AdvocacyAll Hands on Deck Net…Women Donors Network …Tides FoundationNEO Philanthropy Acti…Democracy Fund Voice …New Venture FundGrove Action Fund
Sixteen Thirty FundDC64.4× affinity31 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · America Votes · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Tides Advocacy · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Women Donors Network Action · Tides Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Democracy Fund Voice Inc · New Venture Fund · Grove Action Fund

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 Public Wise Inc 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 30%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Public Wise Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Public Wise Inc 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 66 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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