Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which major donors and foundations fund right-wing political groups in the US?
Executive summary
Major private donors, family foundations and donor-advised funds finance a broad right‑wing ecosystem including think tanks (Heritage), policy networks (State Policy Network affiliates), and Project 2025 advisory groups; one analysis found more than $120 million from a handful of family fortunes to Project 2025 advisory groups since 2020 [1], while reporting estimates conservative foundations and DAFs have funneled billions into related causes such as climate denial and media operations [2] [3]. Available sources document key funders and funding vehicles — Charles Koch network, Lynde and Harry Bradley family networks, DonorsTrust/DAFs, and institutional grants to Heritage and Project 2025 partners — but do not provide a single exhaustive list of “all” major donors [3] [1] [2].
1. Who the reporting names as major funders — a short list
Investigations and philanthropy coverage repeatedly point to a cluster of wealthy families and longstanding conservative foundations: Charles Koch’s foundations and associated networks; the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation and its Bradley Impact Fund; family foundations historically tied to Sarah Scaife–style giving; and DonorsTrust/Donors Capital Fund as a vehicle for conservative philanthropy [3] [2] [4]. DeSmog’s analysis specifically highlights “six family fortunes” that together funneled more than $120 million into Project 2025 advisory groups since 2020 [1]. Reporting also documents grants from mainstream-named foundations to groups that advised Project 2025, complicating the simple “left gives to right” narrative [5].
2. Think tanks and projects that receive heavy funding
The Heritage Foundation appears centrally in multiple accounts: it leads Project 2025, has donated to other advisory organizations, and has itself been a major recipient of large gifts [6] [7] [1]. Project 2025, a 900‑page blueprint for conservative governance, lists more than 100 advisory organizations — and reporting shows substantial private dollars flowed into that advisory ecosystem [8] [1]. Accountable.US and other trackers found Heritage making sizable grants to Project 2025 partners (nearly $1 million in one 2022 filing cited) [7].
3. Funding vehicles and opacity: DAFs, family networks, and “dark money”
Multiple pieces emphasize that donor‑advised funds (DAFs) and intermediaries create anonymity and concentration of influence: the Bradley Impact Fund (connected to the Bradley Foundation) and large DAF sponsors have been used to move money to conservative organizations [4] [9]. Political Research Associates and others argue that Fidelity Charitable-style DAFs and related mechanisms enable sizable transfers to organizations like Heritage without public donor disclosure [9]. Longstanding conservative grantmakers and DAFs are described as a pipeline for funding right‑wing media and policy infrastructure [3].
4. What the money has paid for — policy, personnel, and media
Reporting documents three broad spending priorities: building policy blueprints and personnel rosters (Project 2025’s “Mandate for Leadership” and presidential staffing preparation) [8] [1]; funding right‑leaning media and research operations that amplify conservative narratives [3]; and legal or electoral initiatives including voter‑roll challenges and election‑related projects cited in coverage (PILF, TPPF) [10]. DeSmog and The Guardian connect funding streams to coordinated efforts to reshape federal governance and compile federal employee watchlists [1] [11].
5. Disagreements, limits in the reporting, and contested claims
Sources disagree about motives and the degree of coordination. Some outlets frame this as long‑term conservative institution‑building and policy advocacy (Inside Philanthropy), while watchdog outlets portray the same flows as “dark money” enabling antidemocratic projects (Accountable.US; The Guardian) [2] [7] [11]. Available sources do not provide a single, verified master list of every “major” donor or the complete dollar totals across all right‑wing groups; instead they offer case studies, network analyses, and tax‑form reporting that point to major players and mechanisms [1] [3].
6. What this means for readers and next steps for verification
If you want a defensible, up‑to‑date map, combine: nonprofit tax filings [12] for organizations like Heritage; investigative analyses such as DeSmog’s donor‑network breakdown; philanthropy reporting from Inside Philanthropy; and watchdog aggregations (Accountable.US, Political Research Associates). For specific donor names and grant amounts, consult those tax records and the databases named in reporting — OpenSecrets is cited as a repository for money in politics though it focuses on electoral cycles rather than private foundation grants [13] [14]. Reporting shows clear concentration of funding in a small set of networks and vehicles — but the complete universe of donors remains partially obscured by DAFs and intermediary entities [4] [9].
Limitations: these sources provide strong signposts and figures (e.g., $120M to Project 2025 advisory groups) but do not claim to be comprehensive; available sources do not mention a definitive exhaustive roster of every major donor [1] [3].