Skip to content
The Pipeline Fund at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The Pipeline Fund

The Pipeline Fund is working toward a reflective democracy where skilled, diverse, community leaders are fully supported to run for office, run campaigns, and advance progressive policies that address the urgent needs of all Americans.

$1.8M
Granted FY2024still arriving
15
Grants FY2024still arriving
15
States reached
$343k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01FY2024 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $35k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $36k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+1 grant · $343k
$134,050
Median grant
15
States reached
$2.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GLPALEAD$342,550
LEAD Ohio$208,800
Instituto Power$208,800
Represent Georgia Action Network$208,800
LEAD NC$158,800
Wisconsin Progress$158,800
Democracy Security Project Action F$150,000
LEAD PA$134,050
Florida Pipeline Project$58,800
We the People for Education$50,000
Progressive Pipeline$36,000
Annies List Training and Engagemen$8,800
603 Forward$8,800
LEADMO Action$8,800
One America Votes$8,800
02The need
02

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY24–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 73% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Instituto Power: $209k → 11%Progressive Pipeline: $36k → 10%Annies List Training and Engagemen: $9k → 10%Democracy Security Project Action F: $150k → 14%Florida Pipeline Project: $59k → 15%GLPALEAD: $343k → 5%LEADMO Action: $9k → 21%Represent Georgia Action Network: $209k → 13%LEAD Ohio: $209k → 15%One America Votes: $9k → 9%We the People for Education: $50k → 22%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

NH
WA
WI
MI
OH
PA
CA
MO
VA
AZ
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 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
Lead Pa Institute

Leadership training and comprehensive professional development programs for community activists, advocates, and prospective leaders of nonprofits and other issue advocacy organizations across the

Employment
2
Running Start

Running Start is a nonpartisan nonprofit that trains young women to run for political office. Running Starts programs empower participants with the confidence capabilities connections and civic discourse skills they need to run win and…

Youth Development
3
Glpa-Lead Education Fund

GLPA-LEAD Education Fund is a social welfare and educational organization with a mission to educate future leaders in the state on civic engagement and professional development. The organization works to empower ordinary citizens through…

Employment
4
Progressive Workers Coalition

To ensure that working class people are educated on their voting rights. The coalition engages in mobilization and educational information sessions to ensure that all workers voices are heard.

—
5
Lead Nc Institute

Lead NC institute is a non-partisan organization that seeks, encourages and cultivates a new generation of community and civic leaders for North Carolina through information dissemination, training and leadership development.

Education
6
The Pipeline Fund

The Pipeline Fund is working toward a reflective democracy where skilled, diverse, community leaders are fully supported to run for office, run campaigns, and advance progressive policies that address the urgent needs of all Americans.

—
7
Elevated Voices Inc

Voter education around policy

—
8
Civica Initiatives

Empower people and strengthen democratic institutions

Community Improvement
9
Keystone Democracy

Keystone Democracy's goal is to ensure that all Pennsylvania elections are implemented in a safe, secure, convenient and fair manner. We work to advance pro-democracy policies by informing elected officials, civic leaders, the media, and…

—
10
Blueprint Campaigns

Blueprint campaigns provides professional development support for emerging leaders from traditionally underrepresented communities: from campaign managers and vounteer coordinators, to current and prospective candidates, newly engaged…

—
11
People's Independent Commission

Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay

—
12
America Votes

The Organization was established to coordinate and promote progressive issues, policies, initiatives, and referenda, and to pursue electoral reform that expands access to the ballot.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Leadmo Action; the most unlike its peers is Instituto Power. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the 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.

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

6
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
1/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Represent Georgia Action Network Inc: $208,800 · OtherRepresent Georgia Action Network IncLead NC: $158,800 · OtherLead NCLead PA: $134,050 · OtherLead PAFLORIDA ADVANCEMENT PROJECT INC: $58,800 · OtherFLORIDA ADVANCEMENT PROJECT INCWE THE PEOPLE FOR EDUCATION: $50,000 · OtherWE THE PEOPLE FOR EDUCATIONProgressive Pipeline: $36,000 · OtherProgressive Pipeline+1 more: $8,800 · OtherGLPA-LEAD: $342,550 · Public BenefitGLPA-LEADInstituto Power: $208,800 · Public BenefitInstituto PowerLEAD OHIO: $208,800 · EducationLEAD OHIODEMOCRACY SECURITY PROJECT ACTION FUND: $150,000 · EducationDEMOCRACY SECURITY PROJ…WISCONSIN PROGRESS INC: $158,800 · Civil RightsWISCONSIN P…ONEAMERICA VOTES: $8,800 · Civil RightsLEADMO ACTION: $8,800 · Civil RightsAnnie's List Training and Engagement Fund: $8,800 · Community Improvement
Other$655,250Public Benefit$551,350Education$358,800Civil Rights$176,400Community Improvement$8,800

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGLPA-LEAD: $342,550 over 1y, 63% of budgetRepresent Georgia Action Network Inc: $208,800 over 1y, 58% of budgetLEAD OHIO: $208,800 over 1y, 27% of budgetInstituto Power: $208,800 over 1y, 13% of budgetLead NC: $158,800 over 1y, 43% of budgetWISCONSIN PROGRESS INC: $158,800 over 1y, 29% of budgetDEMOCRACY SECURITY PROJECT ACTION FUND: $150,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetLead PA: $134,050 over 1y, 26% of budgetFLORIDA ADVANCEMENT PROJECT INC: $58,800 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetWE THE PEOPLE FOR EDUCATION: $50,000 over 1y, 7.7% of budget603 FORWARD: $8,800 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetAnnie's List Training and Engagement Fund: $8,800 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetONEAMERICA VOTES: $8,800 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetLEADMO ACTION: $8,800 over 1y, 3.4% 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.

Sixteen Thirty FundAll Hands on Deck Net…America VotesTides Advocacy
Sixteen Thirty FundDC34× affinity14 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · America Votes · Tides Advocacy

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 Pipeline Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Pipeline Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 10%5%19%42%75%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
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Pipeline Fund?

    Find your warmest path to The Pipeline 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 15 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 Pipeline’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