Civic Engagement
Grants
Program Introduction — Civic Engagement
Grants
The Otto Bremer Foundation is pleased to share
the following announcement. The Foundation has added “civic
engagement” as a programmatic strategy.
Otto Bremer was an active participant in civic matters.
He ran for and was elected five times as the City Treasurer
of St. Paul. He also ran for mayor, and later President Roosevelt
appointed him senior manager of the Home Owners Loan Corporation
for Minnesota, one of the “New Deal” organizations established
to help the country through the Depression. While we don’t
expect everyone to run for political office, we hope you
are as inspired as we are by our founder’s interest and involvement
in public affairs.
Civic engagement takes many forms, ranging from public policy,
to community-based organizing, and everything in between.
It is not limited to those that can vote, nor is it limited
to the political arena. Block-clubs, community-based organizations,
unions, and schools are just some of the places where you
can create opportunities for people to engage in and with
their communities.
Back to top
Why Civic Engagement
“…nonprofits have the responsibility to not only provide
services and to advocate for sound social policies but
also to promote citizen participation in all aspects of
life.”)
--Pablo Eisenberg, Georgetown Public Policy Institute Senior
Fellow.
Philanthropists are increasingly asking about underlying
causes of broad social issues. Nonprofits, facing pressures
in finances, accountability, and effectiveness, are considering
how to tell their story to decision-makers. With limited
success on single issue campaigns, organizers are seeking
to integrate their advocacy efforts with more sophisticated
understandings about political structures and the systems
that affect the lives of people. Ordinary citizens, have
an increasing desire to be a vital past of civil discourse
and decision making. These are but a few of the dynamics
playing out in communities across the region.
As interest grows, nonprofit leaders have questions, opportunities,
and challenges associated with deeper engagement on civic
matters. The Otto Bremer Foundation has adopted civic engagement
as a strategy to strengthen nonprofits position within their
own communities as well as influence some of the solutions
to underlying issues they face.
Why focus on “civic engagement”?
Ultimately, the Foundation
is interested in supporting efforts that cause positive change
within communities where people live. We believe that civic
engagement, and its close companion, advocacy, can affect
change on a more systemic level. Our past grants suggest
several reasons why this work is important:
Civic engagement and advocacy can help meet an organization’s
mission and maximize effectiveness by educating and engaging
the public;
Nonprofits are in a unique position to provide timely,
relevant, and authoritative information; they know the issues
from working in the field;
Civic engagement helps ensure awareness by community members
and decision makers of the good work of an organization;
Effective advocacy helps organizations think differently
about the projects they undertake;
Nonprofit participation in civic matters, give people the
most affected by an issues may not have the means or ability
to raise questions or concerns and be heard;
Advocacy efforts – especially those using a rights-based
approach – can bring diverse members of the community together
to work for a common purpose or agenda;
Incorporating civic engagement activities into an organization’s
work can invigorate and motivate staff.
Building
Power
Building power = building capacity
The Foundation interprets “civic engagement” broadly. As
a result, capacity building for new or improved civic engagement
activities may similarly cover a wide variety of activities,
from strengthening professional skills to building power
through one to one conversations between neighbors. Some
organizations may be very experienced at such engagement
work, and others may simply be curious about where engagement
fits with mission and service-related work.
For those with less experience, it may be helpful to address
several questions basic and related questions. What does
your organization want to achieve through civic engagement?
That threshold question should help to clarify goals and
build internal consensus within the leadership of your organization
around specific objectives. Next steps include choosing strategies
and tactics, which may include research, information gathering,
media advocacy, mobilizing grassroots power, and direct lobbying.
After reaching agreement on those preliminary matters, it
will be necessary to assess your readiness to do work in
this area. This may lead to identifying resources necessary
to build the advocacy capacity of the board, staff, volunteers,
and where applicable, constituents or clients.
For more experienced advocates, capacity building may include
building infrastructure to ensure that the ongoing capacity
of an organization does not get swallowed by an intensive
engagement effort. Organizers, on the other hand, may change
the emphasis from issue-specific work to building power by
organizing around electoral politics.
As with all capacity building efforts, threshold questions
about capacity, and the actual work of building capacity,
should be viewed through the ‘lens’ of an organization’s
mission. Sufficiently embraced by board leadership, and appropriately
grounded in external realities, building capacity equals
building power.
Examples include:
- Working
with board members to help them understand the role of
advocacy in relation to an organization’s mission and goals;
- Providing
staff with the skills and time to carry out advocacy activities;
- training on legal “do’s and don’ts”;
- training
on how to form or participate in a coalition or association;
- training on how to do a “power analysis”;
- strengthening
communication skills to effectively interact with elected
officials;
- developing
a strategic plan regarding advocacy and engagement.
Power Anaylsis
powler (pou’?r). n. 1. ability to do or act; capability of
doing or accomplishing something.
You’ve done everything “right” – built consensus within your
organization that some form of engagement is appropriate
and necessary to help meet its mission. Goals were clarified
and issues researched; plans were created and seemingly implemented
flawlessly. Still, at the end of the day, nothing changed.
The landlords are still discriminating against tenants. Elected
officials are not paying attention to “your issue.” Your
organizational base has dissipated.
It is possible that one of the things missing in your work
is a clearer strategic perspective for bringing about power
relations in society.
We have been inspired by an unpublished article called “The
Three Faces of Power,” drawn from the work of several authors.
As the title suggests, there are several dimensions to power,
each of which can affect the strategies and goals of advocates
and organizers.
If you are interested in this aspect of civic engagement
work, and wish to learn more, see the article “Three
Faces of Power.”
Community-Based
Organizing
Strong public policy work is not possible without
some support at the grassroots level. One way to achieve
greater interest and support at that level is through community-based
organizing. While there are several distinct approaches to
organizing, they all share the common denominator of building
relationships between individuals and working to build power.
Community organizing can be a useful tool to work with and
help develop leadership in various communities. Organizing
is a way to give voice to people within communities that
are not reflected or heard by the broader public domain.
Community-based organizing can be particularly powerful because
it takes into account the history and context of individual
communities.
The work of skilled organizers can bridge communities together
and help individuals gain the necessary skills and the understanding
of the various faces of power to shape and change community
issues. However, organizing is not without its challenges.
The work is generally long-term in nature and requires steadfast
commitment to building relationships, which may not show
tangible results in the near term. Over time, however, disciplined
and dedicated organizing can lead to strategic work on public
policies.
What does community organizing look like?
- Taking
steps to identifying common interest among people;
- Building
relationships between people;
- Learning
about "the system" and carrying out research
visits;
- Assessing barriers and opportunities, using a "power
analysis," to
take strategic actions;
- Identifying
and training people to become leaders;
- Building
grassroots coalitions and networks of activists;
- Linking
sectors, organizations, and issues that have not traditionally
worked together on advocacy efforts.
- Using
election cycle activities to start or deepen an organization's
role in issue specific organizing.
Public Policy
Some of the most extraordinary achievements in recent decades
have come because nonprofits were willing to take their
rightful place at the policymaking table. Whether defending
civil liberties, or promoting just and equitable economic
policies, the nonprofit sector has played a vital role
in shaping agendas – from the United States Capitol to
local block clubs.
Whether proposing new legislation or defending one's own
interests, most nonprofits have a stake in shaping public
policy. Why?
- Nonprofits
have the ability to provide timely and credible information
to policy makers;
- Nonprofits,
like businesses, academia, and think tanks, should play
a role in shaping the agenda of public policy priorities;
- An
effective partnership with government funders requires
nonprofits to have capacity to articulate needs, priorities,
and trends of its clients;
Many people associate public policy work with lobbying,
and lobbying on particular pieces of legislation many be
an important tool for some organizations. For most nonprofits
involved in public policy, however, educating constituents,
the community, and policy makers about general issues and
conditions tends to be the bulk of the work in this area.
Thus, the ability to communicate and "tell your story" are
essential tools for good advocates.
Similarly, many nonprofit managers believe they don't have
the time or ability to be a public policy advocate. Thus,
linking to associations, networks, and collaborations, which
may have staff, resources, and expertise in public policy
work, is another way to get started.
Other aspects of public policy work may include:
- Advocacy
training and support for both staff and board
- Non-partisan
education efforts on issues
- Developing
a strong and positive relationship with policy makers;
- Working
alliances with other nonprofits and other sectors on issues
of shared interest;
- Creating
an advocacy strategy.
Some nonprofit leaders lack a clear understanding about
the logistics of public policy work and believe that lobbying
activities will jeopardize their tax-exempt status. In fact,
there are few if any limits on most kinds of public policy
work such as litigation, research, public education, and
attempting to influence decisions by administrative agencies.
Opportunities for nonprofits to lobby is often misunderstood,
so we invite you to visit the Foundation’s website to see
the Do’s and Don’ts section.
Electoral Work
The most basic articulation of civic engagement is rooted
in the single vote and the act of influencing the choice
for elected officials. This choice can be an empowering
way for individuals and communities to participate in public
life. While exercising the right to vote is an important
step, organizations are increasingly working to build presence
beyond immediate election periods.
Electoral-related work typically includes Get Out the Vote
activities, community organizing efforts, and voter education.
Specific examples include:
- Informing
people how governments and the process of elections work;
- Motivating traditionally low-turnout areas, including
populations of lower income, students, non-citizens, and
the newly eligible to vote;
- Preparing
immigrant and refugee communities to participate in the
political process and to hold government officials accountable
for their needs;
- Finding
opportunities and preparing people to participate in representative
activities at any level including but not limited to:
- parent-teacher
associations and boards
- union
elections
- neighborhood
organizations
- churches,
temples, synagogues, and other places of worship
- chambers
of commerce
- citizen
associations
- Non-partisan
voter education activities such as:
- Training
for nonprofit organizations to engage in voter education,
mobilization, and public policy formation within the legal
requirements applicable to 501(c)(3) organizations.
- Candidate
education on public interest issues
- Candidate
debates and forums
Back to top
Evaluating Your Work
The Foundation believes there is value in thinking critically
about what works and what doesn’t. The following describes
our understanding and interests around evaluating engagement
work.
Measuring engagement and advocacy work is complex. The nature
of advocacy and civic engagement makes it especially difficult
to determine which approaches work and which do not. For
example, advocacy goals are often long-term and system-wide.
Yet, successes may be incremental and frequently uneven.
External factors, such as the political and economic environment,
are hard to predict and impossible to control. Likewise,
building relationships between constituents and decision
makers are critical to success but challenging to measure.
Emphasis is on learning. The Foundation is greatly interested
in learning more about the application and impact of various
approaches to civic engagement in local communities. Thus,
we encourage applicants to develop both long-term and incremental
measures of success and progress. Successful advocacy and
engagement efforts usually take time and persistence. Be
as specific – and as reasonable – as possible.
Focus benchmarks on results, progress towards goals, and
capacity-building efforts. Results benchmarks help show success
in achieving one or more of the organization’s goals and
objectives related to engagement. These may take years to
achieve and then still be incomplete!. Examples include changes
in public policy or improvements in programs or services
due to policy change. Progress benchmarks track the steps
your organization has taken to achieve your goals and objectives.
Progress may cover accomplishing key activities and obtaining
incremental results. Increased media coverage and/or editorial
support of a particular issue, or distributing materials
to 50 other groups interested in an issue are sample progress
benchmarks. Capacity building benchmarks demonstrate the
strengthening of an applicant’s capacity to achieve advocacy
success. For some, this may mean starting at the beginning,
with training for board and staff on the issues and opportunities
related to advocacy and engagement. For others, it might
mean developing an e-mail network, or establishing a coalition
with other nonprofits interested in common issues.
Another way to measure the progress of an engagement effort
is by considering its impact on different target audiences,
e.g.: policymakers, constituents, the public, other organizations,
and your own organization.
You are the expert. Although measuring social change through
civic engagement may be subtle and challenging, evaluating
such work does not require a formal study or outside experts.
You are in the best position to decide how best to collect
and analyze your results. Significant information can be
obtained by simply but consistently recording information
about:
- conditions
at the beginning of a project;
- major
activities related to interim and long term objectives,
and progress made on specific measures of success; and
- external
factors and their impact on advocacy strategies can yield
important information about the strength and weaknesses
of an engagement project.
Back to top
Proposal Process
The proposal submission and grant review process for civic
engagement proposals are virtually the same as any other
proposal to the Foundation. All proposals must meet the geographic
and categorical parameters of the Trust instrument that established
the Foundation and meet the Foundation’s mission.
For civic engagement proposals, suggested questions to consider
when writing a proposal should include:
- What
do you want to change?
- Who
wants you to do it?
- How
will you go about changing it?
- What
are your long-term goals and what can reasonably be accomplished
during the grant period?
- What
will you need to do it?
- Who
will help you?
- What
will be your benchmarks of progress, and how will you document
and measure that progress?
- How
does this work strengthen the capacity of the organization?
- How
are you going to communicate your results to others?
- How
will your work be accessible to all members of the community?
- How
will your work promote human rights?
Back to top
Civic Engagement Examples
Community Based Organizing
Centro Campesino (Owatonna, MN) works on local community
issues that relate to basic standards of living and working
conditions for migrant farm laborers and their families.
Rather than relying on outsiders, community members have
taken it upon themselves to develop leaders and advocacy
skills, as well as organize around specific issues.
In 1997, Family and
Children’s Service/Jobs and Affordable Housing Campaign (Minneapolis, MN) organized a community
meeting attended by individuals, primarily African Americans,
who were homeless, inadequately housed, unemployed or underemployed.
Participants identified and prioritized concerns. Those attending
the meeting expressed a strong interest in addressing the
identified issues, and the Jobs and Affordable Housing Campaign
was created as a vehicle for community members to act on
these issues through community organizing. Since then, members
have successfully addressed issues related to affordable
housing, tenants’ rights, police and community relations,
new immigrants’ experiences, and neighborhood safety.
Minnesota State Baptist Convention (Minneapolis, MN). “Mission
to Mobilize” is a collaboration between the Minnesota State
Baptist Convention and the Joint Religious Legislative Coalition.
The focus of the project is to build civic engagement capacity
within communities that have had lower voter turnout and
citizen participation in public policy debates. The collaboration
leaders are organizing leadership committees in six pilot
congregations. The committees are constructing advocacy networks
– a “civic infrastructure for social outreach and justice”
– and organizing mobilization training and issues briefings.
Goals include convening with elected officials, and increasing
voter registration and turn-out efforts.
Jewish Community
Action (“JCA” – St. Paul, MN) has been
working with faith communities to make social justice an
integral part of congregational life. In the process, synagogues
are being catalyzed to transform their own understanding
of social action, from a primary focus on direct service,
to an increasing emphasis on social justice – taking action
against the root causes of poverty, racism, and inequity
in the region. To strengthen and sustain work in these areas,
JCA is training volunteer members to become social justice
leaders in their congregations.
Voter Education
Confederation
of Somali Community in Minnesota (Minneapolis, MN). In 2002, led by
a graduate of Organizing Apprentice Project, a group of Somali
citizens held a public meeting with Senate candidates Wellstone
and Coleman. Emboldened by the strong turnout, and increasing
interest in public issues, Somali Action Alliance (“SAA”)
was formed to build community power through collective action.
In 2004, SAA held a Get-Out-The Vote campaign, which included
voter education work that provided information to over 600
Somali-American about the voting process.
People Escaping
Poverty Project (“PEPP” – Moorhead, MN)
is a grassroots organization located on the border of Minnesota
and North Dakota that grew out of frustration by low income
individuals about housing conditions and community relations
with the police. With a focus on developing leaders from
the community, PEPP has worked to coordinate a common issue
agenda. Recently, PEPP collaborated with the Minnesota Women’s
Foundation and the White House Project to carry out voter
education and candidate forums.
Centro Legal (St. Paul, MN). The Centro Legal Civic Participation
Project worked to inform and engage the Latino community
across the state about voting rights, civic participation,
and the democratic process. Finding no culturally appropriate
materials, Centro Legal developed a Latino Voter Participation
Toolkit on how to vote, where to vote, and where to register
to vote. All of the activities associated with this project
worked to overcome barriers that previously hindered full
civic participation by Latinos.
Minnesota African Women’s
Association (“MAWA” – Minneapolis,
MN) promotes the health and well-being of African refugee
and immigrant women and their families. MAWA’s election organizing
project, “Organizing Pan Africans,” had a short term goal
of engaging Pan Africans through voter education and get
out of the vote activities, including a twelve week targeted
effort within different African communities during the 2004
election year. The project’s other purpose is to develop
a “Girls in Politics” curriculum that will be used to orient
Pan African girls to the political processes in the United
States.
Minnesota Directors Forum (“MDF” – St. Paul, MN) is composed
of directors of service organizations that work with immigrant
and refugee communities. In 2004, MDF leaders decided to
mobilize their constituents from Southeast Asian communities
to get involved in civic processes. The group worked in the
Twin Cities and Rochester on voter education, candidate forums,
getting information covered in different languages, and coordinating
get out the vote activities on election day.
Montana Conservation
Voters Education Fund (Billings, MT).
As a 501(c)(3) established along with a 501(c)(4), Montana
Conservation Voters Education Fund is constantly working
to expand leadership and civic engagement activities with
low and middle-income women and rural people who are interested
in public health and related issues. To ensure that it and
collaborating organizations are working on legally permissible
activities, the Fund provides leadership development training,
including workshops taught by Alliance for Justice.
Public Policy Examples
Minnesota Youth Service Association
(New Hope, MN) is Minnesota’s largest coalition of service
providers for runaway and homesless youth. They provide typical
association support such as communication and networking
opportunities. But, in 2005, they decided to leverage the
expertise and experience of their members to develop a legislative
campaign that focuses attention and resources on the needs
of Minnesota youth and young adults. This statewide advocacy
project, the Minnesota Youth Advancement Act, will highlight
best practices of the systems that protect and provide for
youth.
Child Care Works (Minneapolis, MN) received a grant to work
on child care issues at the state legislative level. Child
Care Works follows child care public policy and deciphers
legislative details for child care advocates. Using online
technology, Child Care Works staff send out daily briefings
and arrange for email advocacy with constituents. The electronic
network has enabled Child Care Works staff to connect with
other social justice advocates, ensuring a more coordinated
advocacy effort on a statewide basis.
Not surprisingly, Parents
United for Public Schools (Minneapolis,
MN) grew out of frustration by a small group of parents concerned
about recent cuts in education funding and the impact it
would have on public schools. Parent United is using a grant
from the Foundation to develop a public relations campaign.
This grassroots effort has evolved to a point where Parents
United is providing accessible information on its website,
organizing parents at the legislature, and incubating parent
organizations on a statewide basis.
Putting the Pieces Together (Bismarck, ND). “Many of our
member organizations are timid in their outlook towards advocacy
and in encouraging their members to participate in community
decision-making,” reports leaders of Putting the Pieces Together,
an association of 34 grass-roots organizations. Yet, “there
appears to be more pent up frustration that not enough is
being done by those in power.” As a result, leaders are working
to provide time and opportunity to discuss and become familiar
with what is possible. An economic justice campaign includes
work ranging from preparing laid-off workers to testify before
local city councils, to organizing public meetings, forums,
and hearings on taxes, budget choices for wages, and health
care. Leaders believe overcoming roadblocks to increased
participation is possible, but “it will take a concerted
effort.”
Growth and Justice (Minneapolis, MN). “How should Minnesota
state and local governments collect the revenue they need,
and why?” is the question Growth and Justice has sought to
answer, in hopes new ideas around taxation and economic justice
can be infused into both the legislative and electoral processes
in the coming years. Strategies include meeting with legislative
candidates and others to develop issue platforms; media and
outreach efforts, including writing articles and editorials,
hosting forums, and participating in other forms of public
debate. Essential to the work of Growth and Justice is its
efforts to involve all sides of an issue and fashion solutions
that appeal to a majority of Minnesotans.
Literacy Volunteers of America (Menomenie, WI). Excerpt
from a letter sent at the behest of Literacy Volunteers staff
related to future funding of their programs:
“Dear Congressman [_________],
I am writing in regards to Adult Basic Education. It is a
good program that has helped me attain my G.E.D., and my
H.S.E.D. is pending. I would’ve never gotten my G.E.D.
if it wasn’t for this program. Why do you want to cut funding
for this program? It is helping me to prepare to get a
job and prepare for my future. I think you should not cut
funding.
Sincerely, [________]”
Back to top
The
Do’s & Don’ts of Civic
Engagement
Lobbying
If you’re not lobbying, you’re not exercising your full rights
under the 1976 Tax Reform Act ("Lobby Law"). The
law permits nonprofits to engage in lobbying and other advocacy
activities, as long as they adhere to some of the broad spending
limitations
In terms of specific activities, a 501(c)(3) organization
CAN:
- Educate
the public on issues and encourage participation in the political
process.
- Educate
all candidates and political parties on your issues.
- General
lobbying on issues.
In terms of expenditures, a 501(c)(3) organization CANNOT:
- Engage
in electioneering (taking a partisan position)
The 1976 Tax Reform Act (Lobby Law)
These guidelines are called “lobbying-expenditure test” and
were passed under Section 501(h) and 4911 of the Tax Reform
Act of 1976. This law clarifies that 501(c)(3) organizations
that elect to fall under these rules can spend up to a
defined percentage of their budget for lobbying without
threatening their tax-exempt status.
If you elect to be covered by the Lobby Law, you need to
do two things:
1. Take
formal steps to elect to fall under the 1976 guidelines.
An organization must file an IRS Form 5768 with the IRS.
2. Know
lobby limits – The 1976 Tax Reform Act divides lobbying into
direct lobbying and grassroots lobbying. Direct lobbying
occurs when an organization communicates its position with
regard to legislation or legislative proposals directly with
legislators, legislative staff, executive branch officials,
and executive staff.
Grassroots lobbying is when an organization asks the public
to support, oppose, or otherwise influence legislation by
contacting elected and appointed officials.
Electoral
Work
Things an organization CAN do as a 501(c)(3) organization:
- Conduct voter registration and nopartisan get-out-the-vote
efforts.
- Educate
the public on issues and encourage participation in the
political process.
- Educate
all candidates and political parties on your issues.
- Conduct
or participate in a nonpartisan candidate forum. The forum
must be open to all candidates, be run in a balanced way,
and include a broad range of nonpartisan questions for
all candidates.
- Make
presentations on your organization's issue to platform
committees, campaign staff, candidates, media, and the
general public.
- Work
on behalf of a ballot measure.
- General
lobbying
- Rent
or sell mailing lists to candidates at fair market value,
if made available to all candidates.
- A
nonprofit can and should inform candidates of its position(s)
on particular issues and urge them to go on record to support
these positions.
- Activities
cannot be biased for or against any candidate or political
party.
- Nonprofits
may invite candidates to meetings or to public forums sponsored
by the nonprofit
- Invitations
must be extended to “all serious candidates”
- Even-handedness
must be maintained: activities cannot be biased for or
against any candidate or party.
Things an organization CANNOT do as a 501(c)(3) organization:
(these restrictions in no way prohibit officers, members,
or employees from participating in a political campaign as
private citizens.)
- Endorse
or oppose a candidate – implicit or explicit. Contribute
money, time or facilities to a candidate.
- Coordinate
activities with a candidate.
- Restrict
rental of your mailing list and facilities to certain candidates.
- Set
up, fund, or manage a Political Action Committee established
under section 527 of the tax code mainly for electoral
activity.
What a foundation CANNOT fund:
While
501(c)(3) organizations may conduct voter registration campaigns,
foundations cannot fund this activity. Foundations can fund
voter education efforts.
Back to top
Online Resource Links
Please note: This list is not exhaustive, rather, a starting
point to identify resources
Non-governmental resources
• Alliance
for Justice
• Advocacy
Institute
• The
Advocacy Project
• American
Association
• Asian
American Legal Defense and Education Fund
• Center
of the American Experiment
• Center
for Asian Pacific Minnesotans
• Center
on Budget and Policy Priorities
• Charity
Lobbying in the Public Interest
• Chicano
Latino Affairs Council
• Council
on Black Minnesotans
• Independent
Sector
• Internal
Revenue Service
• ISAIAH
• League
of the Latin American Citizens
• League
of Women Voters
• Metropolitan
Interfaith Council on Affordable Housing
• Mexican-American
Legal Defense Fund
• Minnesota
Council on Nonprofits
• Minnesota
House
• Minnesota
Indian Affairs Council
• Minnesota
Senate
• National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People
• National
Priorities Project
• National
Council of Nonprofit Associations
• National
Council of La Raza
• OMB
Watch
• Philanthropy
for Active Civic Engagement
• Puerto
Rico Legal Defense Fund
• United
Nations Association of the USA
State Government
• The
National Association of Counties – The National Association
of Counties provide a website that allows you to select the
state in which you are interested in and call up links to
all of the counties within that state with web sites.
• National
Council of State Legislatures
• National
League of Cities
• Public
Technology
• State
and Local Government on the Net
Federal Government
• Firstgov
Portal
• White
House
• Federal
Agencies
• U.S.
Congress
• Congressional
Budget Office
• Supreme
Court
• Library
of Congress
• Federal
Register
• Search
U.S. Code
• Government
Printing Office
• Lobbying
Disclosure Reports
• National
Archives and Records Administration
• Federal
Grant Information
• Campaign
Finance Information
• IRS
Exempt Organization Information
Back to top
