Loading…
Loading…
Washington, D.C. · Nonprofit
CONSORTIUM FOR ELECTIONS & (Washington, D.C.) is funded by 1 grantmaker whose IRS filings report $241,772,747 in grants to it, the largest being CONSORTIUM FOR ELECTIONS & ($241,772,747). 1 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
CONSORTIUM FOR ELECTIONS & has grown faster than half of the 61 public benefit nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 61 public benefit nonprofits over $100M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
100% of CONSORTIUM FOR ELECTIONS &’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (0% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 0 of the last 7 reported years ran a deficit.
Grant income rose $25M → $49M on a roughly flat funder count — a concentrated base.
From the IRS filings of CONSORTIUM FOR ELECTIONS &’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
CONSORTIUM FOR ELECTIONS & is locally rooted: 100% of its grant income comes from Washington, D.C. funders.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Grants and contracts to this organization from federal (USASpending) and state checkbooks, reconciled to its EIN. $1.0B on record.
Federal grants vs contracts are distinguished; state line items keep their reported category. Matched by name + geography (the BMF), so coverage is partial and precision-first.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
100% of spending goes to programs.
100%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2018–2024), and the filings of 1funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing