Loading…
Loading…
Utah · Nonprofit
UTAH RANKED CHOICE VOTING ACTION (Utah) is funded by 3 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $941,500 in grants to it, the largest being UNITE AMERICA INSTITUTE INC ($491,500). 1 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
UTAH RANKED CHOICE VOTING ACTION's funding base is broadening — from 1 funders to 2 as grant income climbed.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 994 civil rights nonprofits under $100k, 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 UTAH RANKED CHOICE VOTING ACTION’s revenue is contributions — about as donation-reliant as the typical peer (100% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 3 of the last 5 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 1 funders to 2 as grant income moved $142k → $185k.
From the IRS filings of UTAH RANKED CHOICE VOTING ACTION’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
UTAH RANKED CHOICE VOTING ACTION leans on a few funders — its largest provides 52% of grant income and the top three 100%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2021 100% · 2022 100% · 2023 100% · 2024 73% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
UTAH RANKED CHOICE VOTING ACTION draws 100% of its grant income from funders outside Utah — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 2 states in all.
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. Your 3 funders put you under-funded among the 174 organizations that share them.
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.
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.
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2020–2024), and the filings of 3funders 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