Skip to content
William J Brennan Center for Justice Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

William J Brennan Center for Justice Inc

The william j.

$121k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$113k
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 2025.

Public Benefit$1.2MCrime & Legal$60kHuman Services$59kCivil Rights$25k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $113k
$112,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$349M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
R STREET INSTITUTE$112,500
PUBLIC POLICY AND EDUCATION FUND$8,000
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 (FY21–24, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 21% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%WE THE VETERANS FOUNDATION: $49k → 8%ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE-ATLANTA: $10k → 9%WE THE VETERANS FOUNDATION: $36k → 8%CITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK: $25k → 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

NY
OH
CA
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.

56%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$749k · 5 repeat orgs$589k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +112% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
11

Total granted

$749k
$589k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+112%
0%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Public BenefitCivil RightsHuman ServicesEducationInternationalPhilanthropyOther
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

  • RS
    R STREET INSTITUTE
    4× · 2022–2025 · $413k · revenue +13%
  • CC
    COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND
    2× · 2020–2021 · $103k · revenue +112%
  • WT
    We the Veterans Foundation
    2× · 2023–2024 · $85k · revenue +261%

Funded once

  • TG
    THE GERMAN MARSHALL FUND OF THE UNITED STATESgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue +29%
  • ISSUE ONEgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue +38%
  • CN
    Citizens Not Politicians
    one grant, 2024 · $100k
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
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
3
RepresentUs

RepresentUs is America's leading nonpartisan grassroots organization working for a government accountable to the people. We unite people from all backgrounds to defend democracy, root out corruption, mobilize action, and support campaigns…

Public Benefit
4
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
5
All Americans Vote

All Americans Vote aims to motivate underrepresented Americans to engage in the most patriotic of exercises - voting!

Civil Rights
6
Voteamerica

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

Civil Rights
7
Fair Democracy

Fair democracy works to ensure that the roots of american democracy are healthy with strong voting rights and access, an engaged and informed electorate, an open and accountable government and trusted messengers engaging americans in civil…

Civil Rights
8
People's Independent Commission

Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay

—
9
Issue One Action

Issue one action is uniting republicans, democrats, and independents to protect our elections and fix our political system. we are committed to free, fair, and secure elections and reducing the influence of well-financed special interests…

—
10
Guarantee Our Votes Project

Protect voting rights in the united states for all citizens and expand voting rights to citizens who have been historically disenfranchised or under-represented in the electoral process.

Civil Rights
11
Voteorg

Vote.org's primary purpose is to build web-based technologies that remove barriers to voting and increase vote turnout.

Civil Rights
12
Foreign Policy for America

Foreign Policy For America is a nonpartisan advocacy organization founded to strengthen support for principled American engagement in the world.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Citizen Action of New York Inc; the most unlike its peers is Houston in 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

16 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

R STREET INSTITUTE: $412,500 · EducationR STREET INSTITUTECOMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $103,050 · Public BenefitCOMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUNDISSUE ONE: $100,000 · Public BenefitISSUE ONEPUBLIC POLICY AND EDUCATION FUND OF NEW YORK INC: $88,000 · Public BenefitPUBLIC POLICY AND EDUCATION F…TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION: $60,000 · Public BenefitTEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATIO…LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA EDUCAT: $61,700 · Civil RightsLEAGUE OF WOM…Southwest Voter Registration Education Project Inc: $52,175 · Civil RightsSouthwest Vot…NEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC: $25,000 · Civil RightsNEW GEORGIA P…Democracy North Carolina: $25,000 · Civil RightsDemocracy Nor…Citizens Not Politicians: $100,000 · OtherCitizens N…NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LATINO ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS INC: $25,000 · OtherNATIONAL A…We the Veterans Foundation: $85,000 · Human ServicesWe the Vet…CITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesCITIZEN AC…ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE ATLANTA INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesASIAN AMER…THE GERMAN MARSHALL FUND OF THE UNITED STATES: $100,000 · InternationalHOUSTON IN ACTION: $65,000 · Philanthropy
Education$412,500Public Benefit$351,050Civil Rights$163,875Other$125,000Human Services$120,000International$100,000Philanthropy$65,000

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 budgetR STREET INSTITUTE: $412,500 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetCOMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $103,050 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE GERMAN MARSHALL FUND OF THE UNITED STATES: $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetISSUE ONE: $100,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetCitizens Not Politicians: $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetPUBLIC POLICY AND EDUCATION FUND OF NEW YORK INC: $88,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetWe the Veterans Foundation: $85,000 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetHOUSTON IN ACTION: $65,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA EDUCAT: $61,700 over 1y, 8.8% of budgetTEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION: $60,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSouthwest Voter Registration Education Project Inc: $52,175 over 1y, 17% of budgetNEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF LATINO ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS INC: $25,000 over 1y, 38% of budgetDemocracy North Carolina: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCITIZEN ACTION OF NEW YORK INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE ATLANTA 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.

Tides FoundationNew Venture FundDemocracy Fund IncNEO Philanthropy IncThe Rockefeller Found…The William & Flora H…Silicon Valley Commun…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Tides FoundationCA17.6× affinity7 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · Democracy Fund Inc · NEO Philanthropy Inc · The Rockefeller Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 William J Brennan Center for Justice Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from William J Brennan Center for Justice Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%10%23%40%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
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    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 16 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on William J Brennan Center for Justice’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