Skip to content
Right to the City Action Fund at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Right to the City Action Fund

To consolidate and grow the power of the renter class to achieve systematic and measurable improvements in civic engagement by renters in under- represented communities to advance policy goals that diminish the impacts of market-driven displacement and secure permanently affordable, non-market alternatives to the crisis of land and…

$469k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$80k
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, FY2021 to 2024.

Civil Rights$295kHousing & Shelter$280kPublic Benefit$240kHuman Services$155kCommunity Improvement$65kEmployment$20kArts & Culture$10k
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $60k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $405k
$60,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$2.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TIDES ADVOCACY$80,000
MET COUNCIL ACTION INC$75,000
BLACK LED ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE$70,000
RIGHT TO THE CITY VOTE ACTION$65,000
UNITED FOR A NEW ECONOMY ACTION$60,000
CAUSE ACTION FUND$55,000
RENTERS FOR POLITICAL TRANSFORMATION$40,000
EL CENTRO CULTURAL DE MEXICO$10,000
SMASH INC$10,000
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, $155k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 39% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CHINESE PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL ACTION: $10k → 16%UNITED FOR A NEW ECONOMY ACTION: $60k → 7%UNITED FOR A NEW ECONOMY ACTION: $35k → 10%CHINESE PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL ACTIO: $50k → 16%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

MN
WI
NY
MA
OH
CA
CO
AZ
GA
FL
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.

41%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$440k · 4 repeat orgs$625k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +18% since the first grant, against -63% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
6

Total granted

$440k
$385k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
-63%

Still filing today

75%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $240k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitHousing & ShelterArts & CultureOther
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

  • BL
    BLACK LEADERSHIP ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE
    3× · 2022–2024 · $175k · revenue +384% · 26% of their budget
  • MC
    Met Council Inc
    3× · 2021–2024 · $110k
  • TA
    TIDES ADVOCACY
    2× · 2021–2024 · $95k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • RIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE
    one grant, 2022 · $165k · revenue +5%
  • HJ
    HOUSING JUSTICE LEAGUE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $65k · revenue -63%
  • HT
    HOME TO STAY MINNEAPOLIS
    one grant, 2021 · $65k · revenue -100%
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
Justice for the People Legal Center

Justice for the People Legal Centers mission shall include but not be limited to the provision of legal services, grassroots organizing, and education to people and communities who have historically endured harm and trauma caused by our…

—
2
Colorado People's Action

Colorado people's action (cpa) is a member-driven, racial justice organization dedicated to winning long-lasting progressive public policies in colorado. cpa builds power by mobilizing voters, electing our own people to office, holding…

—
3
California Center for Movement Legal Services

The California Center for Movement Legal Services (Movement Legal) provides legal services in the pursuit of improving the lives of California's traditionally underserved residents, carrying out legal work that fosters community led policy…

Crime & Legal
4
Newr Denver

Advocate for housing rights and a ballot initiative in Denver, Colorado.

—
5
Unite Oregon Action

unite oregon action works across urban and rural divides to build a unified political, intercultural movement for justice in oregon. we are led by people of color, immigrants and refugees, rural communities, and people experiencing poverty.

—
6
Kc Tenants

KC Tenants organizes to ensure that everyone in Kansas City has a safe, accessible, and truly affordable home.

Civil Rights
7
Save Santa Ana Stop the Unsafe Neighborhoods

Oppose a rent stabilization ballot measure proposed to voters in the City of Santa Ana

—
8
Tenants Together

As California's only statewide renters' rights organization, Tenants Together works to improve the lives of California's tenants through capacity-building, movement-building, and statewide advocacy.

Food & Nutrition
9
Cincinnati Action for Housing Now

Ballot issue political action committee advocating for levy to support the homelessness population in Ohio.

—
10
Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco Inc

The Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco is dedicated to combating the displacement crisis gripping our city by building the power of working-class tenants of color to take on the real estate industry and win housing justice for all.…

Education
11
East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy

Ebase advances economic, racial and social justice by building a just economy in the east bay on good jobs and healthy communities. we address the root causes of economic injustice by developing strategic alliances amount community, faith…

Public Benefit
12
All in Denver

All in Denver is a non-profit advocacy organization that believes an equitable city where all people prosper and thrive is within our reach

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Renters for Political Transformation; the most unlike its peers is Centro Cultural De Mexico En El Condado De Orange. 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

15 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. 15 of the 16 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/15
Grantees still filing
6/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Met Council Inc: $110,000 · OtherMet Council IncTIDES ADVOCACY: $95,000 · OtherTIDES ADVOCACYRIGHT TO THE CITY VOTE ACTION: $65,000 · OtherRIGHT TO THE CITY VOTE ACTIONHOME TO STAY MINNEAPOLIS: $65,000 · OtherHOME TO STAY MINNEAPOLIS9TO5 ACTION FUND: $20,000 · Other9TO5 ACTION FUNDRIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE: $165,000 · Civil RightsRIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANC…RENTERS FOR POLITICAL TRANSFORMATION: $40,000 · Civil RightsRENTERS FOR POLITICAL TRA…PEOPLES DEFENSE INITIATIVE: $35,000 · Civil RightsPEOPLES DEFENSE INITIATIV…BLACK LEADERSHIP ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE: $175,000 · Public BenefitBLACK LEADERSHIP O…UNITED FOR A NEW ECONOMY: $60,000 · Human ServicesUNITED FOR A NEW…CHINESE PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL ACTION INC: $60,000 · Human ServicesCHINESE PROGRESS…UNITED FOR A NEW ECONOMY ACTION: $35,000 · Human ServicesUNITED FOR A NEW…HOUSING JUSTICE LEAGUE INC: $65,000 · Housing & ShelterCAUSE ACTION FUND: $55,000 · Community ImprovementStruggle for Miamis Affordable and Sustainable Housing Incorporated: $10,000 · Community ImprovementCENTRO CULTURAL DE MEXICO EN EL CONDADO DE ORANGE: $10,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$355,000Civil Rights$240,000Public Benefit$175,000Human Services$155,000Housing & Shelter$65,000Community Improvement$65,000Arts & Culture$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBLACK LEADERSHIP ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE: $175,000 over 3y, 26% of budgetRIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE: $165,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetMet Council Inc: $110,000 over 3y, 20% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY: $95,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHOUSING JUSTICE LEAGUE INC: $65,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetHOME TO STAY MINNEAPOLIS: $65,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetUNITED FOR A NEW ECONOMY: $60,000 over 1y, 6.2% of budgetCHINESE PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL ACTION INC: $60,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetCAUSE ACTION FUND: $55,000 over 1y, 43% of budgetRENTERS FOR POLITICAL TRANSFORMATION: $40,000 over 1y, 34% of budgetPEOPLES DEFENSE INITIATIVE: $35,000 over 1y, 89% of budgetUNITED FOR A NEW ECONOMY ACTION: $35,000 over 1y, 77% of budget9TO5 ACTION FUND: $20,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetStruggle for Miamis Affordable and Sustainable Housing Incorporated: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetCENTRO CULTURAL DE MEXICO EN EL CONDADO DE ORANGE: $10,000 over 1y, 1.9% 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.

Right to the City All…Tides Foundation
Right to the City AllianceNY15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Right to the City Alliance · Tides 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 Right to the City Action Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Right to the City Action Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%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
    2get 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 Right to the City Action Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Right to the City Action Fund 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 16 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.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2024, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Right to the City Action’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