Skip to content
Unite America Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Unite America Inc

The mission of unite america, inc.

$17M
Granted FY2024still arriving
27
Grants FY2024still arriving
19
States reached
$9.6M
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, FY2021 to 2024.

Public Benefit$22MCivil Rights$300kEmployment$50kEducation$23kEnvironment$10k
02FY2024 · 27 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k7 grants · $143k
  • $50k–250k11 grants · $956k
  • $250k+9 grants · $16M
$100,000
Median grant
19
States reached
$7.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VOTE YES ON 3 INC$9,620,000
COLORADO VOTERS FIRST$4,420,000
MAKE ALL VOTES COUNT DC$553,000
KEEP COUNTRY FIRST POLICY ACTION INC$300,000
ETERNAL VIGILANCE ACTION INC$275,000
FAIRVOTE ACTION FUND$260,866
BALLOT PA ACTION$250,000
MAKE ELECTIONS FAIR PAC$250,000
PARTNERS IN DEMOCRACY$250,000
AMERICAN POLICY VENTURES ACTION INC$175,000
SAM ADVOCACY FUND INC$130,000
OKLAHOMA UNITED FOR PROGRESS INC$106,250
ONEVIRGINIA2021$100,000
BETTER BALLOT ARIZONA$100,000
NM VOTERS FIRST$95,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 48% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%MAKE ELECTIONS FAIR PAC: $250k → 11%PARTNERS IN DEMOCRACY: $250k → 8%REPRESENTUS INC: $1.0M → 12%MAJORITY VOTE MONTANA: $50k → 9%BALLOT PA ACTION: $250k → 22%VOTE UPSTATE JOBS: $50k → 12%OPEN PRIMARIES INC: $340k → 17%NM VOTERS FIRST: $95k → 14%SECURE DEMOCRACY: $500k → 14%TAKE BACK ACTION FUND: $140k → 15%VETERANS FOR BETTER VOTING NEVADA: $50k → 11%FIX THE SYSTEM - WISCONSIN ACTION INC: $50k → 10%BUILDING POWER FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR: $25k → 12%SAM ADVOCACY FUND INC: $130k → 9%UTAH RANKED CHOICE VOTING ACTION: $50k → 5%UTAHNS FOR RESPONSIVE GOVERNMENT: $30k → 8%ETERNAL VIGILANCE ACTION INC: $275k → 6%COLORADO VOTERS FIRST: $4.4M → 8%BETTER BALLOT FORT COLLINS: $25k → 11%ONE PERSON ONE VOTE: $100k → 15%FAIRVOTE WASHINGTON PAC: $25k → 9%ALASKANS FOR POSTERITY INC: $60k → 22%SOUTH DAKOTA VOTERS FIRST: $30k → 9%NEVADA VOTERS FIRST: $208k → 13%VERMONT PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP INC: $45k → 9%FAIRVOTE ACTION FUND: $261k → 8%BETTER BALLOT ARIZONA: $100k → 11%PARTNERS IN DEMOCRACY: $50k → 8%REPRESENTUS: $300k → 12%SECURE DEMOCRACY: $250k → 14%TAKE BACK ACTION FUND: $100k → 15%FIX THE SYSTEM - WISCONSIN ACTION INC: $50k → 10%SAM ADVOCACY FUND INC: $125k → 9%ETERNAL VIGILANCE ACTION INC: $177k → 6%NEVADA VOTERS FIRST: $200k → 13%FAIRVOTE ACTION FUND: $250k → 8%REPRESENTUS INC: $100k → 12%DEMOCRACYFIRST: $50k → 14%FIX THE SYSTEM - WISCONSIN ACTION INC: $50k → 10%OREGON RANKED CHOICE VOTING ADVOCATES: $100k → 12%FAIRVOTE ACTION FUND: $50k → 8%REPRESENTUS: $40k → 12%MAKE ALL VOTES COUNT DC: $553k → 14%FAIRVOTE ACTION FUND: $50k → 8%ISSUE ONE ACTION: $383k → 14%COMMON CAUSE: $50k → 14%AMERICAN POLICY VENTURES ACTION INC: $175k → 14%MORE VOICE DC: $50k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
ME
VT
WA
MT
WI
NY
MA
OR
NV
SD
OH
PA
CT
CA
UT
CO
MO
VA
MD
AZ
NM
AR
DC
OK
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

23%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.2M · 15 repeat orgs$17M to everyone else

15 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 19 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
15

Total granted

$5.2M
$1.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
0%

Still filing today

80%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $16M went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsPublic BenefitEducationMembership BenefitHuman ServicesOther
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

  • FA
    FAIRVOTE ACTION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $611k · revenue +48%
  • EV
    Eternal Vigilance Action Inc
    2× · 2023–2024 · $452k · revenue +122% · 38% of their budget
  • PI
    PARTNERS IN DEMOCRACY INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $325k · revenue +219%

Funded once

  • IO
    ISSUE ONE ACTION
    one grant, 2022 · $383k · revenue +6% · 53% of their budget
  • OP
    Open Primaries Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $340k · revenue -29% · 32% of their budget
  • FW
    FAIRVOTE WASHINGTON
    one grant, 2022 · $150k · revenue -88%
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
Presidential Election Project Inc

Securing reforms to the electoral count act

—
2
Protect Colorados Vote

To oppose a colorado statewide ballot initiative to join the national popular vote compact

—
3
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
4
Yes On National Popular Vote

Support "yes" vote on referendum dealing with national popular vote

—
5
Election Reformers Network Inc

To strengthen democracy in the United States through an assessment of US voting systems and US election administration from the perspective of global best practices.

Civil Rights
6
Upstate Action Alliance

Non-PartisanVoter Educ Advocacy

Civil Rights
7
People's Independent Commission

Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay

—
8
Election Watch Inc

Research analyze publish information to public on elections election systems laws and campaign financing.

Civil Rights
9
Open Democracy Action

Bring about and safeguard political equality for the people of New Hampshire. This will only happen through an open, accountable, and trusted democratic government, of, by, and for the people, that is free from the corrupting influence of…

—
10
Texas Justice Fund

To support legal, political & administrative efforts to protect fair voting.

—
11
Right Vote Inc
Civil Rights
12
Protect Majority Rule
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Issue One Action; the most unlike its peers is Ballot Pa Action. 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

38 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. 38 of the 49 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.

14
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
36/38
Grantees still filing
12/38
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Vote Yes on 3: $9,620,000 · OtherVote Yes on 3COLORADO VOTERS FIRST: $4,420,000 · OtherCOLORADO VOTERS FIRSTSecure Democracy: $750,000 · Other+30 more: $4,390,599 · Other+30 moreRepresentUs: $1,440,300 · Public BenefitRepresent…Open Primaries Inc: $340,000 · Public BenefitOpen Prim…NM Voters First: $95,000 · Public Benefit+2 more: $75,000 · Public BenefitEternal Vigilance Action Inc: $452,050 · Civil RightsKEEP COUNTRY FIRST POLICY ACTION INC: $300,000 · Civil RightsBALLOT PA ACTION: $250,000 · Civil RightsOREGON RANKED CHOICE VOTING ADVOCATES: $120,000 · Civil RightsUTAH RANKED CHOICE VOTING ACTION: $50,000 · Civil Rights+2 more: $45,000 · Civil RightsFIX THE SYSTEM-WISCONSIN ACTION INC: $175,000 · Membership BenefitFAIRVOTE WASHINGTON: $150,000 · Human ServicesEDUCATION REFORM NOW ADVOCACY INC: $22,500 · EducationCONTINA IMPACT: $10,000 · Education
Other$19,180,599Public Benefit$1,950,300Civil Rights$1,217,050Membership Benefit$175,000Human Services$150,000Education$32,500

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 budgetVote Yes on 3: $9,620,000 over 1y, 33% of budgetRepresentUs: $1,440,300 over 4y, 15% of budgetSecure Democracy: $750,000 over 2y, 9.6% of budgetFAIRVOTE ACTION: $610,866 over 4y, 22% of budgetEternal Vigilance Action Inc: $452,050 over 2y, 38% of budgetNEVADA VOTERS FIRST: $407,650 over 2y, 100% of budgetISSUE ONE ACTION: $383,333 over 1y, 53% of budgetOpen Primaries Inc: $340,000 over 1y, 32% of budgetPARTNERS IN DEMOCRACY INC: $325,000 over 3y, 18% of budgetKEEP COUNTRY FIRST POLICY ACTION INC: $300,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetSAM Advocacy Fund: $255,000 over 2y, 43% of budgetBALLOT PA ACTION: $250,000 over 1y, 97% of budgetTAKE BACK OUR REPUBLIC ACTION: $240,000 over 2y, 40% of budgetAMERICAN POLICY VENTURES ACTION INC: $175,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetFIX THE SYSTEM-WISCONSIN ACTION INC: $175,000 over 4y, 33% of budgetOKLAHOMA UNITED FOR PROGRESS INC: $166,250 over 2y, 25% of budgetFAIRVOTE WASHINGTON: $150,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetOREGON RANKED CHOICE VOTING ADVOCATES: $120,000 over 2y, 7.4% of budgetOne Person One Vote: $100,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetNM Voters First: $95,000 over 1y, 45% of budgetProtect AR Constitution: $75,000 over 1y, 9.3% of budgetALASKANS FOR POSTERITY INC: $60,000 over 1y, 29% of budgetVERMONT PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP INC: $54,500 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetDEMOCRACYFIRST: $50,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetCOMMON CAUSE: $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetUTAH RANKED CHOICE VOTING ACTION: $50,000 over 1y, 91% of budgetUNITE NY ACTION: $50,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetUtahns for Responsive Government DBA Better Boundaries: $30,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetSouth Dakota Voters First: $30,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetBUILDING POWER FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR: $25,000 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetEDUCATION REFORM NOW ADVOCACY INC: $22,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCOMMON GROUND ARKANSAS INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMCCE ACTION: $15,000 over 1y, 35% of budgetCONTINA IMPACT: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBlack Voters Matter Fund Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Article IVSixteen Thirty FundFinal-Five Fund IncUnite America Institu…Fairvote ActionAction Now IncNorth FundTides Advocacy
Article IVVA36.8× affinity15 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Article IV · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Final-Five Fund Inc · Unite America Institute Inc · Fairvote Action · Action Now Inc · North Fund · 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 Unite America Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Unite America Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%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
    8get 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 Unite America Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Unite America Inc 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 49 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 Unite America’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