How much did STATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND grant in FY2023?

STATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND reported 4 grants totaling $1,250,658 in its FY2023 IRS filing.

Where is STATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND based?

STATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND is based in DC.

STATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND

Foundation Dossiers Mostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →

· Public charity

STATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND

Provide the education and skills needed to connect everyday people with their state government and work to help state governments represent the diverse population of their communities and advance policies that promote inclusion, equality, and opportunity for all.

$1.3M

Granted FY2023

Grants

Communities

$1.1M

Largest

01What you fund

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 83% of STATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2020

dlcc

2021

committee

2022

participationpac

2023

—

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2023 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

$10k–50k2 grants · $50k
$50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$250k+1 grant · $1.1M

$100,000

Median grant

States reached

$342k

Total assets

Largest grants

DEMOCRATIC LEGISLATIVE CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE$1,100,000
A BETTER WISCONSIN TOGETHER$100,000
AMPLIFY NEW HAMPSHIRE$25,000
603 FORWARD$25,000

02The need

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 (FY21–21, $70k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15% — the area typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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 line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — 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.

52%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$2.6M · 3 repeat orgs$2.4M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +24023% since the first grant, against +451% for the ones you funded once.

3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$2.6M

$2.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24023%

+451%

Still filing today

67%

61%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $150k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Civil RightsCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesEducationOther

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

OV
OUR VOICES OUR VOTE
3× · 2020–2023 · $2.5M
CV
COLORADO VALUES PROJECT
2× · 2020–2022 · $95k · revenue -64%
FF
family friendly action fund
2× · 2020–2022 · $90k · revenue +24023%

Funded once

TV
THE VOTING PROJECTgraduated
one grant, 2021 · $350k · revenue +29%
VP
virginia plus PAC
one grant, 2022 · $325k
LM
legislative majority pac
one grant, 2022 · $300k

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.

Democracy for America Advocacy Fund

Democracy for America Advocacy Fund (DFA-AF) is a 501(c)(4) organization that advocates for fair, just, inclusive, and equitable public policies that benefit all, not just a few. DFA-AF was launched to take on structural democracy reform…

—

Fairvote Washington

To promote electoral reform in Washington state

Human Services

Oklahoma United for Progress Inc

OKUnited is a bipartisan grassroots advocacy movement formed to educate and advocate for improved civic engagement, and to take actions that encourage and produce better voter participation, representation, choices, and nonpartisan…

—

American Prosperity Alliance

American Prosperity Alliances mission is to advocate for legislative and regulatory policies that advance economic prosperity in America.

—

Oklahoma Forward Inc

Oklahoma Forward works to identify what everyday Oklahomans care about, and help to give them a stronger voice in state government. By creating an environment where Oklahoma voters feel empowered, we can encourage a posi

—

America Votes

To coordinate and promote progressive issues, policies, initiatives and referenda, and to pursue electoral reform that expands access to the ballot.

Community Improvement

Maine Donor Alliance Fund

Maine Donor Alliance Fund and Maine Donor Alliance both work to build lasting progressive power through year-round investment in strategic infrastructure organizations in Maine. We use strategic philanthropy to advance the goals of our…

Education

Majority Forward

To advocate for progressive policies and engaging in nonpartisan voter registration.

—

Nebraskans for Better Governance

To promote election reform measures in the State of Nebraska.

—

Nc for the People Action (formerly Nc Voters for Clean Elections)

To improve the election process by making the act of voting more accessible to citizens, to lessen the influence of money in politics and to generally make elected officials more responsive to the citizens of North Carolina.

Public Benefit

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…

—

Colorado Democracy Alliance

The Colorado Democracy Alliance is an organization committed to protecting democracy and expanding Colorados civic engagement ecosystem.

Civil Rights

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Amplify New Hampshire and the most unlike its peers is 603 Forward. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

21 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

19/21

Grantees still filing

16/21

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$4,224,590Civil Rights$455,000Community Improvement$300,000Human Services$70,000Education$30,000

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.

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.

America VotesDC35× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: America Votes · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Strategic Victory Fund · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Tides Foundation · North Fund · Hopewell Fund · Women Donors Network Action · State Engagement Fund · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · New Venture Fund · All Hands on Deck Network Inc

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 organisation STATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND 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 moneyreceives it· size = income

2get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%

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. 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

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: OKLAHOMA GROWTH ALLIANCE.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

6 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 813175973 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on OKLAHOMA GROWTH ALLIANCE, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 72% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to State Democracy Action Fund?

Find your warmest path to State Democracy Action Fund through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

STATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

21 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to State Democracy Action Fund?

More from the funding graph

STATE DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

21 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to State Democracy Action Fund?

More from the funding graph