Skip to content
State Democracy Project at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

State Democracy Project

The STATE DEMOCRACY PROJECT dedicates itself to serving the general public and policy makers regarding the need to iteratively improve american democracy by encouraging increased citizen participation in elections and policy-making, as well as more responsive government institutions at the local, state and federal levels.

$47M
Granted FY2024still arriving
26
Grants FY2024still arriving
15
States reached
$30M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2024.

Public Benefit$63MHealth$2.3MCivil Rights$2.1MPhilanthropy$398kCommunity Improvement$125kHuman Services$80kEducation$50k
02FY2024 · 26 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $115k
  • $50k–250k10 grants · $1.1M
  • $250k+10 grants · $46M
$137,984
Median grant
15
States reached
$5.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WORKING FAMILIES POWER$29,888,301
PRO DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN$9,931,750
WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION - GNDN$1,519,019
BE A HERO EDUCATION FUND$1,364,769
NEW GEORGIA PROJECT$1,000,000
PROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA$500,000
BLACK MALE INITIATIVE OF GA$400,000
WISDOM INC$380,000
BLACK MEN BUILD$366,685
CAROLINA FEDERATION FUND$300,000
COMMUNITY CHANGE$200,000
CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY$200,000
GRASSROOTS ARKANSAS$137,984
PEOPLES ACTION INSTITUTE$125,000
OHIO ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE$100,000
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 (FY19–24, $219k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 91% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%CITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK INC: $60k → 14%HMONG AMERICAN WOMEN'S ASSOCIATION: $25k → 17%TIDES CENTER: $20k → 10%HMONG AMERICAN WOMEN'S ASSOCIATION: $15k → 17%VOCES DE LA FRONTERA: $100k → 17%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

ME
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
NV
OH
PA
CA
CO
AZ
NM
AR
NC
DC
GA
TX
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$64M · 14 repeat orgs$4.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +57% since the first grant, against -16% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 19 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
7

Total granted

$64M
$220k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%
-16%

Still filing today

93%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.9M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsPublic BenefitHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementHealthEducationOther
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

  • WF
    WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC
    4× · 2020–2024 · $48M · revenue +57% · 58% of their budget
  • BA
    BE A HERO EDUCATION FUND INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $2.2M · revenue +21% · 75% of their budget
  • PENNSYLVANIA VOICE
    2× · 2021–2022 · $77k · revenue +116%

Funded once

  • CA
    CITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK INC
    one grant, 2019 · $60k · revenue +8%
  • AA
    ARIZONA ADVOCACY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue -100%
  • MT
    Make the Road New York
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -21%
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
Democracy Works Inc

The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.

Civil Rights
2
One for Democracy Action Fund

One for democracy unlocks resources to build a healthy democracy by fostering meaningful relationships between philanthropists and the democracy leaders of our time.

—
3
Coalition for Dc Representation in Congress Education Fund

Founded in 1998, dc vote is a national citizen engagement and advocacy organization dedicated to strengthening democracy and securing equality for all in the district of columbia.

Education
4
People's Independent Commission

Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay

—
5
Voteamerica

The mission of voteamerica is to strengthen united states democracy by increasing voter turnout.

Civil Rights
6
Democracy Forward

See schedule o.this organization seeks to build collective power to defend and advance a vibrant democracy that benefits all people.

—
7
League of Women Voters of New Jersey

Through grassroots people-powered advocacy and organizing, lwvnj trains, mobilizes, and educates advocates to have a greater voice in government and influence public policy.

—
8
We Stand United Campaign Inc

We Stand United is an educational and advocacy campaign to protect our democracy and enhance fairness, equality, and prosperity for all. The campaign is committed to ensuring voter rights and access, and increasing voter registration and…

—
9
Women Winning

To encourage, promote, support, and elect pro-choice women of all political parties to all levels of public office in minnesota.

Public Benefit
10
Register America

The organization is founded for social welfare purposes, including assisting with voter registration and advocating for policies which lead to increased voter registration in the united states.

—
11
The Campaign Legal Center Inc

The nonpartisan campaign legal center advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every american's rights to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic…

Crime & Legal
12
Center for Popular Democracy Action Fund Inc

The center for popular democracy action (cpda) and its affiliates know that everyday people have the power to change the world. we upend business and politics as usual to forge a representative, multiracial government and society where we…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pro-Democracy Campaign; the most unlike its peers is Innovation Ohio Education Fund. 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

40 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. 40 of the 42 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
39/40
Grantees still filing
16/40
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $47,656,628 · Civil RightsWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INCPRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN: $10,956,750 · Civil RightsPRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN+10 more: $2,236,302 · Civil RightsSTATE DEMOCRACY ACTION: $1,570,000 · OtherUN-PAC ACTION: $443,000 · OtherGRASSROOTS ARKANSAS: $137,984 · Other+9 more: $293,560 · OtherBE A HERO EDUCATION FUND INC: $2,218,875 · Health+2 more: $92,622 · HealthSTATE DEMOCRACY PROJECT: $366,685 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $255,000 · Public BenefitTHE OHIO ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE: $100,000 · Public BenefitCITIZEN ACTION OF WISCONSIN EDUCATION FUND INC: $70,000 · Public BenefitTAKEACTION MN EDUCATION FUND: $30,000 · Public BenefitTIDES FOUNDATION: $398,045 · PhilanthropyWISDOM INC: $380,000 · PhilanthropyCAROLINA FEDERATION FUND: $300,000 · Human ServicesVOCES DE LA FRONTERA INC: $100,000 · Human ServicesCITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK INC: $60,000 · Human ServicesHmong American Womens Association Inc: $39,271 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTER: $20,000 · Human ServicesCENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE: $200,000 · Community ImprovementPEOPLE'S ACTION INSTITUTE: $125,000 · Community ImprovementAmerica Votes: $75,000 · Community Improvement
Civil Rights$60,849,680Other$2,444,544Health$2,311,497Public Benefit$821,685Philanthropy$778,045Human Services$519,271Community Improvement$400,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $47,656,628 over 4y, 58% of budgetPRO-DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN: $10,956,750 over 2y, 65% of budgetBE A HERO EDUCATION FUND INC: $2,218,875 over 3y, 75% of budgetSTATE DEMOCRACY ACTION: $1,570,000 over 3y, 73% of budgetNEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC: $1,000,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetPROGRESSIVE LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE OF NEVADA: $500,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetUN-PAC ACTION: $443,000 over 3y, 100% of budgetBLACK MALE INITIATIVE GEORGIA INC: $400,000 over 1y, 9.1% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $398,045 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWISDOM INC: $380,000 over 1y, 9.0% of budgetSTATE DEMOCRACY PROJECT: $366,685 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCAROLINA FEDERATION FUND: $300,000 over 1y, 9.6% of budgetCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $255,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE: $200,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetPEOPLE'S ACTION INSTITUTE: $125,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetTHE OHIO ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE: $100,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetVOCES DE LA FRONTERA INC: $100,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA VOICE: $76,777 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetAmerica Votes: $75,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetFLORIDA RISING TOGETHER INC: $75,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetMICHIGAN VOICES: $74,525 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetCITIZEN ACTION OF WISCONSIN EDUCATION FUND INC: $70,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY: $65,477 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK INC: $60,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetONE ARIZONA: $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWISCONSIN DEMOCRACY CAMPAIGN INC: $50,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetARIZONA ADVOCACY FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN: $42,622 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHmong American Womens Association Inc: $39,271 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetTAKEACTION MN EDUCATION FUND: $30,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetMake the Road New York: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetARIZONA CENTER FOR EMPOWERMENT: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA BLACK ALLIANCE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetRURALORGANIZING-DOT-ORG EDUCATION FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetFREEDOM RIGHTEOUS ORGANIZING COLLABORATIVE: $25,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetMAINE PEOPLE'S RESOURCE CENTER: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE OLE EDUCATION FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSTATE VOICES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetInnovation Ohio Education Fund: $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% 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.

Tides FoundationNew Venture FundWindward FundNEO Philanthropy IncAmalgamated Charitabl…Working Families Orga…State VoicesImpactassetsincSolidago FoundationHopewell FundTelescope FundCenter for Community …
Tides FoundationCA36.7× affinity20 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Windward Fund · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Working Families Organization Inc · State Voices · Impactassetsinc · Solidago Foundation · Hopewell Fund · Telescope Fund · Center for Community Change

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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.

    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 42 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.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on State Democracy 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