Skip to content

· Public charity

ReflectUS

ReflectUS accelerates and maximizes the collective impact of change makers working to expand political leadership of, by, and for all women.

$831k
Granted FY2022
8
Grants FY2022
5
States reached
$305k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2022.

Public Benefit$1.6MCivil Rights$565kEducation$295kCommunity Improvement$223k
02FY2022 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • $50k–250k7 grants · $515k
  • $250k+1 grant · $305k
$70,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$387k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Represent Woman$305,000
She Should Run$92,000
National Hispanic leadership Agenda$72,500
Asian Pacific American Institute$70,000
Ignite$70,000
Vote Run Lead Inc$70,000
Higher Heights Leadership Fund$70,000
Women's Public Leadership Network$70,000
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 (FY19–22, $317k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%She Should Run: $92k → 14%She Should Run: $80k → 14%She Should Run: $75k → 14%She Should Run: $70k → 14%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.
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.7M · 9 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2022, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
0

Total granted

$2.7M
$0

Still filing today

78%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22
Civil RightsCommunity ImprovementEducationHuman ServicesOther
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

  • RI
    REPRESENTWOMEN INC
    4× · 2019–2022 · $525k · revenue +352% · 37% of their budget
  • VR
    VOTE RUN LEAD INC
    4× · 2019–2022 · $295k · revenue +154%
  • WP
    WOMEN'S PUBLIC LEADERSHIP NETWORK
    4× · 2019–2022 · $290k · revenue +4% · 38% of their budget

Funded once

    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
    Leadership Women Inc

    Leadership Womens mission is to ensure womens full and effective participation and equal opportunities for leadership at all levels of decision-making in political, economic, and public life.

    Public Benefit
    2
    Independent Women's Forum

    Engage more individuals in the civic process, educate them about the impact of public policies on their lives and our economy, and build support for policies that empower individuals.

    Civil Rights
    3
    Bay Area Women Leader Network

    How Women Lead elevates diverse women in the corporate, public, philanthropic, and and nonprofit sectors by cultivating a robust network that trains and connects women executives who are catalysts in their fields. We collectively donate to…

    Human Services
    4
    Ayada Leads

    Ayada Leads is a nonpartisan civic leadership organization that supports multicultural society, multicultural democracy, and gender equality. Our mission is to equip New Americans, particularly African Diaspora Women, to excel in…

    Human Services
    5
    League of Our Own Washington

    A league of our own is dedicated to finding talented women to run for office and provide them the tools, resources, training, and mentorship to be successful candidates and effective leaders.

    —
    6
    Independent Women's Voice

    Engage more individuals in legislative advocacy, educate them about the impact of public policies on their lives and our economy, and build support for policies that empower individuals by giving them greater freedom and autonomy.

    Civil Rights
    7
    National Political Caucus Lead

    Develop women leaders

    Public Benefit
    8
    Voterunlead Action Inc

    Vote run lead action trains pro-democracy, anti-racist, and feminist women to address the long-standing underrepresentation of women in legislatures. as a nonpartisan but values-aligned and mission-driven body, vrla advocates for key…

    Community Improvement
    9
    World Pulse Voices

    World Pulse is a global social impact network connecting women from 227 countries to accelerate social change. We provide a safe and supportive online space where women can speak for themselves, make powerful connections, and access the…

    Human Services
    10
    International Women's Democracy Center

    Iwdc was established to strengthen women's global leadership through training, education, networking and research with a focus on increasing the participation of women in politics, policy and decision making within their own communities.

    International
    11
    Women's Congressional Policy Institute

    WCPI's mission is to bring together a community of bipartisan women policymakers and trusted partners to advance issues of importance to women, develop the next generation of women leaders, and foster a more effective and representative…

    Social Science
    12
    The Policy Circle Co

    The policy circle is a national, nonpartisan organization that informs, equips, and connects women to be more impactful citizens and influential local leaders.(continued on schedule o) the policy circle's agile and flexible model has three…

    Social Science
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Women's Public Leadership Network; the most unlike its peers is Asian Pacific Amer InstitCongressional. 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.

    3
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    3
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    7/9
    Grantees still filing
    4/9
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    REPRESENTWOMEN INC: $525,000 · Civil RightsREPRESENTWOMEN INCAsian Pacific Amer InstitCongressional: $285,000 · Civil RightsAsian Pacific Amer InstitCongressionalHigher Heights Leadership Fund: $280,000 · Civil RightsHigher Heights Leadership FundIGNITE: $295,000 · EducationIGNITEWOMEN'S PUBLIC LEADERSHIP NETWORK: $290,000 · EducationWOMEN'S PUBLIC LEADERSHI…VOTE RUN LEAD INC: $295,000 · Community ImprovementVOTE RUN LEAD INCNATIONAL HISPANIC LEADERSHIP AGENDA INC: $222,500 · Community ImprovementNATIONAL HISPANIC LEAD…SHE SHOULD RUN: $317,000 · Human ServicesSHE SHOULD RU…Empowered Women: $150,000 · Other
    Civil Rights$1,090,000Education$585,000Community Improvement$517,500Human Services$317,000Other$150,000

    Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

    25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetREPRESENTWOMEN INC: $525,000 over 4y, 37% of budgetSHE SHOULD RUN: $317,000 over 4y, 7.9% of budgetVOTE RUN LEAD INC: $295,000 over 4y, 4.2% of budgetIGNITE: $295,000 over 4y, 3.5% of budgetWOMEN'S PUBLIC LEADERSHIP NETWORK: $290,000 over 4y, 38% of budgetAsian Pacific Amer InstitCongressional: $285,000 over 4y, 3.9% of budgetHigher Heights Leadership Fund: $280,000 over 3y, 7.9% of budgetNATIONAL HISPANIC LEADERSHIP AGENDA INC: $222,500 over 4y, 51% 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.

    Panorama GlobalWA19.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Panorama Global · Barbara Lee Family Foundation Inc · Pivotal Philanthropies Foundation · Harnisch Family Foundation · Tides Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%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, FY20–25
      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 ReflectUS?

      Find your warmest path to ReflectUS 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 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.

      Source object · view filing

      Play a game based on ReflectUS’ filings →

      More from the funding graph