Clearer connections.
Organization file • Washington, D.C. • Democratic redistricting network
National Redistricting Foundation.
Money and litigation in Utah.
A reported $30,000 contribution to the Constitution PIC is one connection. Court filings show a separate role in Utah’s redistricting fight. Its affiliation with the National Democratic Redistricting Committee supplies the political context.
Reported PIC contribution
$30,000Cash • March 19, 2026 • Transaction 1479057Organization identity
501(c)(3)EIN 82-0757693 • Separate from the Action FundReviewed tax-return contributions
$9.70m$9,698,390 • Fiscal year ending June 30, 2024The Utah recipient’s record
$30,000 to the Constitution PIC.
The reviewed 2026 recipient ledger lists National Redistricting Foundation as a $30,000 cash contributor on March 19, using a Washington, D.C. address. No in-kind support from this donor appears in the reviewed snapshot.
This is a named contribution into the PIC. It does not reveal the original donors behind the foundation or show that its separate legal work was paid for by the PIC.
Open the state contribution ledger →A documented Democratic affiliation
Three related names.
Distinct organizations.
In an April 8, 2024 statement, the National Democratic Redistricting Committee identifies National Redistricting Foundation as its 501(c)(3) affiliate. This is an organization’s own description of the political network, rather than an inference from a shared policy position.
The foundation’s reviewed Form 990 also identifies National Redistricting Action Fund, EIN 82-0738281, as a related 501(c)(4) organization on Schedule R. The foundation, the Action Fund and the National Democratic Redistricting Committee should retain their separate names and legal identities in the reporting.
NDRC’s description of its foundation affiliate → · Schedule R: the related Action Fund →
Court participation • A separate connection
The Utah litigation record.
February 11, 2026: National Redistricting Foundation moved to intervene in Powers Gardner v. Henderson, case 2:26-cv-00084.
February 13: It filed an amicus brief opposing the requested preliminary injunction.
February 24: The court denied its motion to intervene. Intervention as a party and participation as an amicus are different roles.
These filings document an effort to support Utah’s court-adopted congressional map. They do not establish that the foundation controlled the Constitution PIC, or that its $30,000 contribution financed a specific court filing.
Foundation’s case page and filing links → · Read the court’s order denying intervention →
The public disclosure limit
The contribution is visible.
The full original donor list is not.
The inspected return covers July 1, 2023–June 30, 2024 and reports $9,698,390 in contributions and grants. Its public Schedule B marks contributor information “RESTRICTED.” That copy does not name the full underlying donor list.
This older fiscal-year total is not money spent on the 2026 Utah campaign. A newer fiscal-year 2025 return is listed in Nonprofit Explorer, but its full schedules were not inspectable during this reporting pass.
Reviewed public Schedule B → · Return index, including the newer filing →
What the evidence establishes.
The documented connections are a reported cash contribution, a stated NDRC affiliation, a tax-reported relationship with the Action Fund, and Utah court participation. They are different kinds of evidence. No direct grant to Alliance for a Better Utah or Utah Donor Collaborative is established by this profile.
Reporting remains open to updates and responses. A donor-information restriction is a limit on what this public copy reveals; it does not itself establish unlawful conduct. Live state records can change after the reviewed snapshot.