Skip to content
Southwest Organizing Project at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Southwest Organizing Project

The mission of swop is to empower the disenfranchised in the southwest to realize racial and gender equality, and social and economic justice.

$90k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$90k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Civil Rights$178kCrime & Legal$175kYouth Development$75kPhilanthropy$70kEducation$63kHuman Services$33kCommunity Improvement$23kArts & Culture$14kOther$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$90,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$4.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LA PLAZITA INSTITUTE$90,000
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 (FY17–25, $306k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%NM ASIAN FAMILY CENTER: $19k → 14%NM ASIAN FAMILY CENTER: $14k → 14%NM ASIAN FAMILY CENTER: $10k → 14%LA PLAZITA INSTITUTE: $90k → 14%LA PLAZITA INSTITUTE: $37k → 14%LA PLAZITA INSTITUTE: $28k → 14%LA PLAZITA INSTITUTE: $20k → 14%YOUTH DEVELOPMENT INC: $10k → 14%EL CENTRO DE IGUALDAD Y DERECHOS: $41k → 14%EL CENTRO DE IGUALDAD Y DERECHOS: $22k → 14%NEW MEXICO IMMIGRANT LAW CENTER: $5k → 14%FRONTLINE RESURRECTION: $10k → 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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$389k · 5 repeat orgs$178k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +132% since the first grant, against +10% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
14

Total granted

$389k
$178k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+132%
+10%

Still filing today

100%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’23’24’25
Human ServicesCivil RightsEducationArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • LP
    LA PLAZITA INSTITUTE
    4× · 2017–2025 · $175k · revenue +125%
  • SU
    SOMOS UN PUEBLO UNIDO
    2× · 2017–2018 · $64k · revenue +321%
  • EC
    EL CENTRO DE IGUALDAD Y DERECHOS
    2× · 2017–2018 · $63k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • PF
    PARTNERSHIP FOR COMMUNITY ACTIONgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $23k · revenue +609%
  • TO
    THE OLE EDUCATION FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $22k · revenue +178%
  • SA
    SWOP ACTION FUND
    one grant, 2018 · $20k
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
Community Power New Mexico
Community Improvement
2
Comunidad De Colores

Our mission is to promote health equity in Northern New Mexico by improving quality and access to health services regardless of one's insurance status or ability to pay.

Health
3
Nm Comunidades En Accion Y De Fe

CAFE is a faith based Non Profit community organization with the purpose of training and organizing low and moderate income families to shape public policy.

Human Services
4
Casa Partners 4NMKIDS Inc

The casa program is a community-based program that recruits, trains and supports citizen-volunteers to advocate for the best interests of abused and neglected children in courtrooms and communities. the organization serves children in…

Civil Rights
5
New Mexico Voices for Children

To improve the status, well-being and racial/ethnic equity of new mexicos children, families, and communities in the areas of health, education, and economic security by promoting public policies through credible research and effective…

Civil Rights
6
Leadership New Mexico

Strengthening new mexico by educating and connecting diverse leaders through experiential learning programs and activities.

Arts & Culture
7
Centro Binacional Para El Desarrollo Indigena Oaxaqueno

Building Indigenous power through collective action to achieve economic, social and cultural development.

International
8
Social and Emotional Learning Alliance for Nm

Social and emotional learning (SEL) is integral to human development and education. Through reliable developmental relationships, young people learn who they are and imagine who they might become as healthy, contributing adults in their…

Education
9
Law Access New Mexico

Provide respectful high quality legal advice, counsel, brief services and referral to low-income New Mexicans and help remove barriers to the civil justice system.

—
10
El Centro Poder Y Accion

El centro poder y accion is an albuquerque-based civil rights and workers' justice organization that advocates for just working conditions and policies that ensure all new mexicans' have the opportunity to thrive. we focus on growing the…

Civil Rights
11
Equal Access to Justice Inc

To increase access to justice by supporting and expanding free civil legal services for low-income new mexicans. for 35 years, equal access to justice has been providing unrestricted, noncompetitive funds to legal aid organizations who…

Philanthropy
12
Dual Language Education of New Mexico

To champion equitable educational opportunities that honor and leverage the diverse linguistic and cultural assets of every learner. defender oportunidades educativas equitativas que honren y aprovechen los diversos recursos lingsticos y…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Somos Un Pueblo Unido; the most unlike its peers is Frontline Resurrection. 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

18 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. 18 of the 20 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
12/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LA PLAZITA INSTITUTE: $174,926 · Human ServicesLA PLAZITA INSTITUTEEL CENTRO DE IGUALDAD Y DERECHOS: $62,584 · Human ServicesEL CENTRO DE IGUALDAD Y DERECHOSNEW MEXICO ASIAN FAMILY CENTER: $42,996 · Human ServicesNEW MEXICO ASIAN FAMILY CENTER+3 more: $25,042 · Human Services+3 moreSOMOS UN PUEBLO UNIDO: $63,724 · Civil RightsSOMOS UN PUEBLO U…THE OLE EDUCATION FUND: $22,205 · Civil RightsTHE OLE EDUCATION…SOUTHWEST ORGANIZING PROJECT: $10,000 · Civil RightsSOUTHWEST ORGANIZ…WORKING CLASSROOM INC: $44,759 · OtherWORKING CLASSROOM I…SWOP ACTION FUND: $19,500 · OtherSWOP ACTION FUNDT NET LLC: $10,000 · OtherT NET LLCKeshet Dance Company: $10,000 · OtherKeshet Dance Compan…NEW MEXICO REENTRY CENTER: $10,000 · OtherNEW MEXICO REENTRY …Pegasus Legal Services for Children: $10,000 · OtherPegasus Legal Servi…EARTH CARE INTERNATIONAL EARTH CARE NEW MEXICO: $6,000 · OtherEARTH CARE INTERNAT…NEW MEXICO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $70,014 · PhilanthropyNEW MEXICO C…PARTNERSHIP FOR COMMUNITY ACTION: $22,555 · Community ImprovementPARTNERSHIP FOR COMMUNITY ACTION INC: $17,874 · EducationCENTER OF SOUTHWEST CULTURE INC: $14,464 · Arts & Culture
Human Services$305,548Civil Rights$95,929Other$110,259Philanthropy$70,014Community Improvement$22,555Education$17,874Arts & Culture$14,464

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLA PLAZITA INSTITUTE: $174,926 over 4y, 3.9% of budgetNEW MEXICO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $70,014 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetSOMOS UN PUEBLO UNIDO: $63,724 over 2y, 4.3% of budgetEL CENTRO DE IGUALDAD Y DERECHOS: $62,584 over 2y, 9.7% of budgetNEW MEXICO ASIAN FAMILY CENTER: $42,996 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetPARTNERSHIP FOR COMMUNITY ACTION: $22,555 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetTHE OLE EDUCATION FUND: $22,205 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetPARTNERSHIP FOR COMMUNITY ACTION INC: $17,874 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER OF SOUTHWEST CULTURE INC: $14,464 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetKeshet Dance Company: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetYOUTH DEVELOPMENT INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFrontline Resurrection: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetSOUTHWEST ORGANIZING PROJECT: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNEW MEXICO REENTRY CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetPegasus Legal Services for Children: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetEARTH CARE INTERNATIONAL EARTH CARE NEW MEXICO: $6,000 over 1y, 0.9% 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.

Albuquerque Community…Marshall L and Perrin…Santa Fe Community Fo…WK Kellogg FoundationCon Alma Health Found…Center for Civic Poli…New Mexico Community …Annie E Casey Foundat…Tides FoundationAmalgamated Charitabl…Rockefeller Philanthr…La Plazita Institute
Albuquerque Community FoundationNM32.1× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Albuquerque Community Foundation · Marshall L and Perrine D McCune Charitable Foundation Inc · Santa Fe Community Foundation · WK Kellogg Foundation · Con Alma Health Foundation Inc · Center for Civic Policy · New Mexico Community Foundation · Annie E Casey Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · La Plazita Institute

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–75%
    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 Southwest Organizing Project?

    Find your warmest path to Southwest Organizing Project 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 20 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Southwest Organizing Project’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