· Public charity
Win Minnesota
WIN Minnesota educates and informs Minnesota residents about the positions of public officials and candidates for office on issues related to health care, the environment, economic justice, and human rights.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 7 grants below total $1,197,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,225,497 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $28,497 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $2k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $40k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $270k
- $250k+2 grants · $885k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Alliance for a Better Minnesota | $600,000 |
| Working America | $285,000 |
| America Votes | $150,000 |
| Minnesota Youth Collective | $120,000 |
| Legacy Coordination Network Advocat | $30,000 |
| Civic Ark | $10,000 |
| Minnesota Voice | $2,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY21–21, $45k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +141% since the first grant, against -6% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 47% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $640k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- WAWORKING AMERICA4× · 2017–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +187%
- BCBLUEPRINT CAMPAIGNS4× · 2019–2022 · $390k · revenue +141%
- BCBLACK CIVIC NETWORK6× · 2018–2023 · $382k · revenue +160% · 58% of their budget
Funded once
- CFCITIZENS FOR A WORKING AMERICA INCone grant, 2018 · $550k · revenue -90%
- CMCONSERVATION MINNESOTA VOTER CENTER INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $225k · revenue +360% · 68% of their budget
- AVAMERICA VOTES ACTION FUND2× · 2022–2023 · $150k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To develop and advocate for public policy that makes Minnesota's economy more prosperous and fair for all Minnesotans.
To encourage, promote, support, and elect pro-choice women of all political parties to all levels of public office in minnesota.
The league of women voters minnesota a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization committed to civic engagement, with a mission to empower voters and defend democracy. membership is open to all genders age 16 and up. through our partnership with…
To create, encourage, and promote center right policies based on the principles of freedom, limited government, American exceptionalism, and strong policies in the state of MN, and to engage in any lawful act or activity for which…
FairVote Minnesota Foundation promotes better democracy through improving the voting system across the state. We provide research and education about the effects our voting system has on the quality of democracy and advocate for Ranked…
Organizes and advocates for local and state policy change to improve voting methods in public elections.
The Minnesota Leadership Council on Aging is uniting leaders to advance equitable opportunities for all Minnesotans as we age.
The citizens league is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that empowers people to engage in civic life and public policy, to make minnesota a better place to live and work for everyone.
Ayada Leads is a nonpartisan civic leadership organization that supports multicultural society, multicultural democracy, and gender equality. Our mission is to equip New Americans, particularly African Diaspora Women, to excel in…
To develop and advocate for legislation, regulations, ballot initiatives, and government programs as a voice of the working class, to promote social justice, and to stimulate the economy; and, to conduct research, educate the public, and…
Ccm helps local governments achieve significant and measurable improvements by giving them the tools to be more efficient. we do this by providing private sector pro bono expertise to solve specific, tangible problems for governmental…
Protect Minnesota promotes a culture of health and safety for all Minnesotans by preventing gun violence through research education advocacy and community investment. We emphasize prevention using a public health model and we seek to build…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Takeaction Minnesota and the most unlike its peers is Civic Ark. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 16 years old; the field is 18. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 13% of your grantees by number, and just 7% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 13% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
27 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 27 of the 30 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds WORKING AMERICA ↗
- Who funds MINNESOTA YOUTH COLLECTIVE ↗
- Who funds Alliance for a Better Minnesota ↗
- Who funds CITIZENS FOR A WORKING AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds BLUEPRINT CAMPAIGNS ↗
- Who funds BLACK CIVIC NETWORK ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION MINNESOTA VOTER CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GrassRoots In Action ↗
- Who funds America Votes ↗
- Who funds Minnesota Voice ↗
- Who funds REPOWER ↗
- Who funds COPAL COMMUNIDADES ORGANIZANDO EL PODER Y LA A ↗
- Who funds TIOGA FUND INC ↗
- Who funds FAITH IN MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ESTIMATORS INC ↗
- Who funds TAKEACTION MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds LEADERSHIP MATTERS MN ↗
- Who funds THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds Isuroon ↗
- Who funds STATE INNOVATION EXCHANGE ↗
- Who funds CENTRO DE TRABAJADORES UNIDOS EN LUCHA ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD MINNESOTA NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds OUTFRONT MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds AB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PRO-CHOICE MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds CIVIC ARK ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Sixteen Thirty Fund · America Votes · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Twin Cities Schools' Telecommunications Group · Minnesota Voice · Women Donors Network Action · North Fund · Headwaters Foundation for Justice · The Minneapolis Foundation · Tides Foundation · Laborers International Union of North America - District Council of Mn and Nd · Center for Popular Democracy Inc
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Win Minnesota funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Win Minnesota?
Find your warmest path to Win Minnesota 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.