· Public charity
Redwood Creek Action
To support efforts that strengthen the united states' democratic processes and ideals.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2024–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 16 grants below total $545,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $565,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $20,000 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 · FY2025
- $10k–50k11 grants · $240k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $305k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OUR AMERICAN FUTURE FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| PROGRESSIVE CHANGE INSTITUTE | $55,000 |
| RUN FOR SOMETHING | $50,000 |
| P STREET PROJECT | $50,000 |
| HIGHER GROUND LABS MANAGEMENT | $50,000 |
| PLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND | $40,000 |
| INDIVISIBLE PROJECT | $30,000 |
| FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY ACTION | $30,000 |
| COUNCIL ON TECHNOLOGY & SOCIETY | $25,000 |
| SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND | $25,000 |
| PROGRESSIVE CHANGE CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE | $20,000 |
| INDIVISIBLE CIVICS | $20,000 |
| GREENLIGHT AMERICA | $20,000 |
| INCLUSIVE ABUNDANCE INITIATIVE | $10,000 |
| A BETTER WISCONSIN TOGETHER | $10,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY24–24, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those 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.
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.
The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.
Ipc's purpose is to lessen the burdens of government and to protect, promote and preserve the natural environment by: 1) developing and supporting programs to finance and stimulate demand for clean energy investment in residential,…
Accountable.us is a watchdog organization that shines a light on the corrupting influence of powerful corporations and special interests on policymaking. we use investigative research to expose improprieties and communicate our findings to…
To drive principled solutions through rigorous analysis, reasoned negotiation, and respectful dialogue. to actively promote bipartisanship and work to address the key challenges facing the nation including energy and infrastructure,…
The mission of voteamerica is to strengthen united states democracy by increasing voter turnout.
Advance democracy, inc. is a non-partisan nonprofit that produces independent public-interest research and journalism to educate the public on important public matters. the organization conducts highly-technical, specialized research,…
American policy ventures foundation is dedicated to reducing polarization and fostering cross-partisan problem-solving on important issues.
The center for american progress action fund's (the action fund) mission is to impact the national debate and transform progressive ideas into policy through rapid response communications, public education, grassroots organization and…
One for democracy unlocks resources to build a healthy democracy by fostering meaningful relationships between philanthropists and the democracy leaders of our time.
Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.
Upturn advances equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology.
To develop and promote innovative fundraising tools and practices that utilize internet technology among social welfare organizations for the purpose of increasing grassroots engagement in social welfare activities, as well as…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Organizing Empowerment Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is Texas Blue Action Fund. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
24 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. 24 of the 28 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 Progressive Change Institute ↗
- Who funds HOPEWELL FUND ↗
- Who funds Collective Impact Action ↗
- Who funds OUR AMERICAN FUTURE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds Bluebonnet Data Inc ↗
- Who funds ORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds P STREET PROJECT ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN INDEPENDENT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Texas Blue Action Fund ↗
- Who funds Yale University ↗
- Who funds WORKMONEY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds PLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC ↗
- Who funds NEO Philanthropy Inc ↗
- Who funds INDIVISIBLE PROJECT ↗
- Who funds FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY ACTION ↗
- Who funds Abundance Network Education ↗
- Who funds SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND ↗
- Who funds GREENLIGHT AMERICA ↗
- Who funds INDIVISIBLE CIVICS ↗
- Who funds TIDES ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds INCLUSIVE ABUNDANCE INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds A BETTER WISCONSIN TOGETHER INC ↗
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: Tides Foundation · Future Forward USA Action · Hopewell Fund · America Votes · Tides Advocacy · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Oakw Fund · Advocacy Action Fund Inc · Strategic Victory Fund · The Leonard & Sophie Davis Fund · Clean and Prosperous America · American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees
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 Redwood Creek Action 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.
- Yale University — 12% 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 Redwood Creek Action?
Find your warmest path to Redwood Creek Action 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.