Fact check: What major grants or large donations did Patrisse Cullors, Alicia Garza, and Opal Tometi acknowledge or direct and how were they disbursed?

1. What the original claims actually allege — money, recipients, and optics that shook public trust

The core claims assert that Patrisse Cullors and the BLM network acknowledged or directed major grants and large donations that were then disbursed to family, friends, and insiders, including specific payments to Cullors’s brother Paul and others, and that a relatively small portion of funds reached outside charities. Reporting in May 2022 named figures such as $840,993 paid to Paul Cullors for security services and $969,459 to Damon Turner for creative services, and described broader spending that included grants, real estate, and charter flights ^{[2] [4]}. A later 2023 piece amplified the critique, asserting that only 33% of donations went to charities and citing additional payments to individuals close to the founders, including reported consultant fees and executive compensation that critics labeled as self-dealing ^[3]. These claims combine verifiable line-item payments from filing reviews with normative judgments about appropriate use of philanthropic funds; the factual thread concerns the amounts and named recipients, while controversy arises over governance and disclosure.

2. What the organization itself reported — massive fundraising and stated grant plans

BLMGNF’s publicly released 2020 Impact Report and related filings document that the network raised more than $90 million in 2020, reported $8.4 million in expenses that year, and planned to share $21.7 million in grants with activist groups and local chapters, indicating both large inflows and intended distributions to the movement’s infrastructure ^[1]. These internal figures establish the scale: the organization moved from grassroots fundraising to handling institutional-sized sums, which necessitated new grantmaking, contracting, and administrative structures. Supporters framed the inflow as transformative funding for community defense, mutual aid, and policy work; critics argued that the sudden scale demanded higher financial controls and transparency. The existence of the $21.7 million grant plan is a factual baseline against which allegations about specific disbursements and contractor payments can be compared ^[1].

3. Investigative reporting that named payments to family and associates — specifics and implications

Multiple investigative pieces in May 2022 examined IRS filings and vendor lists and reported payments to individuals tied to Cullors and to board members, quantifying millions in payments to security, creative, and consulting vendors identified as family or close associates ^{[2] [4]}. The New York Post and other outlets cataloged similar amounts and noted over $37 million in spending that included grants, real estate, and charter flights, focusing attention on vendor selection and governance ^[4]. A 2023 report reiterated concerns, presenting an analysis that roughly a third of donations went to charitable activities while substantial sums were paid to executives or those close to founders, and it named additional payments such as consulting fees to board members ^[3]. These accounts rely on IRS and organizational records for the dollar amounts but reach divergent conclusions on whether the payments constituted malfeasance versus permissible contracting; that dispute centers on governance practices and whether conflicts of interest were avoided and disclosed.

4. What is documented about Alicia Garza and Opal Tometi’s roles in grantmaking and donations

Public records and organizational summaries in the provided material show Alicia Garza’s ongoing leadership in movement-aligned organizations — for example, her roles with Black Futures Lab, the Black Census Project, and as an advisor to the Liberation Fund, which reported granting $2.4 million to 52 grantees in 2024 — though the supplied analyses do not document Garza or Opal Tometi personally directing the large BLMGNF disbursements cited for 2020–2022 ^{[5] [6]}. The material does not supply comparable independent reporting that ties Opal Tometi to the specific contested vendor payments attributed to Cullors. The distinction matters: BLM’s founders have held different institutional roles, and while BLMGNF’s financial actions drew scrutiny, attributing specific disbursement decisions requires documentary evidence of authorization, which is not supplied here for Garza or Tometi in the cited materials ^{[5] [6]}.

5. What the records don’t settle and where reporting diverges — transparency, governance, and political framing

The available documentation establishes major fundraising and named vendor payments, but it leaves unanswered questions about governance processes, contractual competitive bidding, and internal approvals that would clarify whether payments represented wrongdoing or poor optics under rapid scaling ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}. Investigative outlets emphasized apparent conflicts and labeled expenditures as problematic, while organizational reports presented grant totals and fundraising context; these different framings reflect contrasting agendas: watchdog reporting prioritized accountability and potential mismanagement, while internal reports emphasized grantmaking intentions and movement expansion. Major gaps persist in publicly available detail about board minutes, vendor selection rationale, and complete disbursement timelines, so the factual record supports the existence of the payments and planned grants but cannot alone determine intent or legal breach without additional primary documents beyond those cited ^{[2] [3] [1]}.