Skip to content
The Just Trust for Action at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Just Trust for Action

Tjtfa accelerates the momentum of criminal justice reform advocates driving change--from watershed legislative victories to the generations-long battles that change perceptions--across every corner of the country.

$16M
Granted FY2024still arriving
24
Grants FY2024still arriving
12
States reached
$5.0M
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, FY2022 to 2024.

Crime & Legal$30MCivil Rights$19MPublic Benefit$1.8MHuman Services$270k
02FY2024 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $105k
  • $50k–250k11 grants · $1.4M
  • $250k+8 grants · $14M
$100,000
Median grant
12
States reached
$57M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FWDUS$5,000,000
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION$3,000,000
ACTION FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE$3,000,000
DRUG POLICY ACTION$1,500,000
VERA ACTION$750,000
FAMILIES AGAINST MANDATORY MINIMUMS$500,000
REBUILD THE DREAM$300,000
STAND FOR CHILDREN$300,000
JUSTICE RESEARCH GROUP$200,000
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF LOUISIANA$200,000
EMPOWER MISSISSIPPI$200,000
AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION$100,000
QUEST FOR DEMOCRACY ACTION$100,000
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF WEST VIRGINIA$100,000
UNIFYUS$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 (FY22–24, $7.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 96% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%ACTION FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE: $3.0M → 12%FORWARD JUSTICE ACTION NETWORK: $250k → 8%FORWARD JUSTICE ACTION NETWORK: $20k → 11%ACTION FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE: $3.0M → 12%FAMILIES AGAINST MANDATORY MINIMUMS FOUNDATION: $500k → 14%ACTION FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE: $500k → 12%ACTION FOR SAFETY AND JUSTICE: $100k → 12%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

NY
OR
WY
OH
CA
CO
KY
WV
VA
NC
DC
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 14% of The Just Trust for Action’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Just Trust for Actionlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$41M · 19 repeat orgs$3.2M to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
11

Total granted

$41M
$2.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-9%
+10%

Still filing today

95%
82%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $655k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
Civil RightsCrime & LegalPublic BenefitHuman ServicesPublic Safety & DisasterYouth 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

  • AC
    AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $9.0M · revenue +37%
  • VA
    VERA ACTION INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $1.6M · revenue +157% · 47% of their budget
  • AC
    AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $1.6M · revenue +37%

Funded once

  • AP
    Adams Project
    one grant, 2023 · $650k · 100% of their budget
  • FA
    FAMILIES AGAINST MANDATORY MINIMUMS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $500k · revenue -59%
  • PF
    PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES
    one grant, 2022 · $300k · revenue +15%
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
American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska

Preservation and promotion of civil rights and civil liberties.

—
2
American Civil Liberties Union of Alaska Foundation

The aclu of alaska is a non-partisan organization dedicated to advancing the cause of civil liberties in alaska through public education and legal action.

Civil Rights
3
American Civil Liberties Union of Delaware Inc

The organization monitors legislation that could impact civil liberties and takes the necessary action to support or oppose such legislation.

—
4
American Civil Liberties Union of Arkansas Inc

The aclu of arkansas was organized for the purpose of advancing the cause of civil liberties, including free speech, free press, free assemblage, and equality before the law, without political partisanship.

—
5
American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee Inc

To protect and expand individual liberties through legislative advocacy & lobbying efforts at both the state and local levels.

—
6
American Civil Liberties Union

The aclu of alabama battles to protect and expand the civil liberties and civil rights of alabamians.

—
7
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Oregon Inc

The aclu foundation of oregon is dedicated to preserving and defending civil liberties and civil rights.

Civil Rights
8
American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona

The american civil liberties union of arizona is the state's premier guardian of liberty working through the arizona legislature and communities statewide to defend and preserve individual rights and freedoms guaranteed to all by the…

—
9
American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia Inc

The aclu of georgia is dedicated to preserving the civil liberties enshrined in the u.s. constitution and bill of rights. through litigation, lobbying, and communications, the aclu of georgia works to preserve and enhance the rights of all…

—
10
American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee Foundation Inc

To protect and expand individual liberties through public education; to provide legal assistance to aggrieved persons; to provide bill of rights protection.

—
11
American Civil Liberties Union of Washington

To protect and extend civil liberties and civil rights, and to take action to further those liberties and rights within the state of washington.

—
12
American Civil Liberties Union Fund of the District of Columbia

Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina Legal Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Quest for Democracy Action Network. 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

32 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 32 of the 36 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.

17
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
32/32
Grantees still filing
14/32
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FWDUS INC: $10,000,000 · Civil RightsFWDUS INCDRUG POLICY ACTION: $4,500,000 · Civil RightsDRUG POLICY ACTIONFAITH AND FREEDOM COALITION INC: $1,000,000 · Civil RightsFAITH AND FREEDOM COALITION INC+3 more: $335,000 · Civil RightsAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION INC: $9,000,000 · OtherAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION INCYES ON 820 - OKLAHOMANS FOR SENSIBLE MARIJUANA LAWS: $2,059,500 · OtherYES ON 820 - OKLAHOMANS FOR SENSIB…FAMILIES AGAINST MANDATORY MINIMUMS: $1,000,000 · OtherFAMILIES AGAINST MANDATORY MINIMUM…EMPOWER MISSISSIPPI: $600,000 · Other+13 more: $2,775,000 · Other+13 moreREFORM ACTION FUND: $5,200,000 · Crime & LegalREFORM ACTION FUN…VERA ACTION INC: $1,650,000 · Crime & LegalVERA ACTION INCAdams Project: $650,000 · Crime & LegalAdams ProjectPRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $300,000 · Crime & Legal+1 more: $100,000 · Crime & LegalAlliance for Safety and Justice Action Fund dba Action for Safety and Justice: $6,600,000 · Human ServicesAlliance for Saf…FAMILIES AGAINST MANDATORY MINIMUMS FOUNDATION: $500,000 · Human ServicesFAMILIES AGAINST…FORWARD JUSTICE ACTION NETWORK: $270,000 · Human ServicesAMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION INC: $1,600,000 · Public BenefitREBUILD THE DREAM: $600,000 · Public BenefitOCPA ACTION INC: $120,000 · Public BenefitSAFETY AND JUSTICE OREGON: $1,675,000 · Public Safety & DisasterSTAND FOR CHILDREN INC: $750,000 · Youth Development
Civil Rights$15,835,000Other$15,434,500Crime & Legal$7,900,000Human Services$7,370,000Public Benefit$2,320,000Public Safety & Disaster$1,675,000Youth Development$750,000

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 budgetFWDUS INC: $10,000,000 over 2y, 39% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION INC: $9,000,000 over 3y, 2.1% of budgetAlliance for Safety and Justice Action Fund dba Action for Safety and Justice: $6,600,000 over 2y, 69% of budgetREFORM ACTION FUND: $5,200,000 over 2y, 50% of budgetDRUG POLICY ACTION: $4,500,000 over 3y, 47% of budgetSAFETY AND JUSTICE OREGON: $1,675,000 over 2y, 85% of budgetVERA ACTION INC: $1,650,000 over 3y, 47% of budgetAMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION INC: $1,600,000 over 3y, 6.5% of budgetFAMILIES AGAINST MANDATORY MINIMUMS: $1,000,000 over 2y, 42% of budgetFAITH AND FREEDOM COALITION INC: $1,000,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetSTAND FOR CHILDREN INC: $750,000 over 3y, 4.2% of budgetAdams Project: $650,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetEMPOWER MISSISSIPPI: $600,000 over 3y, 33% of budgetREBUILD THE DREAM: $600,000 over 2y, 65% of budgetFAMILIES AGAINST MANDATORY MINIMUMS FOUNDATION: $500,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetFoundation for Judicial Discretion: $400,000 over 2y, 50% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF KENTUCKY INC: $370,000 over 3y, 24% of budgetKentucky Chamber Advocacy Committee Inc: $340,000 over 3y, 38% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION: $340,000 over 3y, 56% of budgetPRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $300,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFORWARD JUSTICE ACTION NETWORK: $270,000 over 2y, 21% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION: $200,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetJUSTICE RESEARCH GROUP: $200,000 over 1y, 33% of budgetDREAMORG: $200,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUNIFY US: $135,000 over 1y, 47% of budgetOCPA ACTION INC: $120,000 over 2y, 85% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF ALABAMA FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTH CAROLINA LEGAL FOUNDATION INC: $100,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetAmerican Civil Liberties Union of Colorado: $75,000 over 1y, 3.7% 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.

Action Now IncChan Zuckerberg Initi…Justice Action NetworkThe Heising-Simons Ac…Open Society Action F…New Venture FundAmerican Civil Libert…The Just Trust for Ed…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…
Action Now IncTX24.1× affinity9 shared granteesties to 8 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Action Now Inc · Chan Zuckerberg Initiative Advocacy · Justice Action Network · The Heising-Simons Action Fund · Open Society Action Fund Inc · New Venture Fund · American Civil Liberties Union Inc · The Just Trust for Education · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 The Just Trust for Action funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Just Trust for Action. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%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
    5get no government money at all
    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 The Just Trust for Action?

    Find your warmest path to The Just Trust for Action 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 36 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 Just Trust for 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