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.
Are there PACs or foundations funding Project 2025 separate from corporate donations and what are their timelines?
Executive Summary
Project 2025 is funded in part by noncorporate actors—foundations, wealthy families, and aligned nonprofits—separate from direct corporate donations, with a funding arc traceable at least back to 2020 and continuing into 2024–2025. Reporting and financial disclosures show major contributions channeled through foundations tied to six wealthy families and through conservative nonprofits connected to The Heritage Foundation and allied groups; timelines in public reporting span 2020–2025 but vary by entity and reporting cycle [1] [2] [3].
1. Who’s bankrolling the engine: billionaire families and foundations revealed
Investigations and donor-tracking reporting identify six wealthy family networks and their foundations as major philanthropic backers of Project 2025–linked activity, with names repeatedly appearing in the funding trail: the Coors, Koch, Uihlein, Scaife, Seid, and Bradley families. These families and their foundations directed over $120 million to Project 2025 advisory groups and related conservative infrastructure beginning in 2020 and continuing into later cycles, indicating a sustained, multi-year funding strategy rather than a narrow, one-off campaign [1]. Those flows are documented through foundation grants and grants to The Heritage Foundation, the author of Project 2025, establishing a clear line from private foundations into the project’s institutional home [4]. The disclosure cadence differs by donor: some foundations report multi-year grants in annual filings while others appear via grants to intermediary organizations, making exact timing granular but overall timeframe clear: 2020–2025.
2. Nonprofit intermediaries and the opaque channels: Heritage, AFs, and donor-advised funds
The Heritage Foundation sits at the center of Project 2025’s production and has received sizable foundation support; its 2023 and 2024 financials show major income from contributions and grants, with 14% of 2024 income from foundations and program spending aligned with Project 2025 activities [5] [3]. Reporting also identifies allied nonprofits—such as Heritage Action for America and other 501(c)[6]/[7] or 527 vehicles—as both recipients and conduits of funding, complicating direct attribution [4]. Additionally, donor-advised funds and intermediary nonprofits like the American Accountability Foundation and the 85 Fund appear in the trail, introducing opacity: donor-advised gifts and grants from politically active foundations can obscure original donors and create staggered timelines between grant commitments and public reporting [2] [4].
3. Political vehicles and PACs: explicit PAC backing versus counter-PAC activity
Public-record PAC activity is mixed: some PACs explicitly oppose Project 2025 and disclose donor lists—Stop Project 2025 PAC and End Project 2025 groups show itemized donor records for 2023–2024 cycles, indicating active political spending against the project and exposing individual and organizational donors [8] [9]. On the pro-Project 2025 side, political spending is more entangled with conservative nonprofit networks and affiliated PACs tied to think tanks; Heritage and related entities maintain political arms and lobbying expenditures rather than straightforward PAC line-items, and their disclosures show institutional contributions and grants rather than a single Project 2025 PAC ledger [10] [3]. The record indicates both sides use PACs and nonprofits, but direct PAC funding for Project 2025 is less centralized and often routed through think-tank related entities.
4. Timing: multi-year strategy with peaks in 2022–2025 reporting
Donor timelines show sustained funding beginning in 2020 with notable activity in 2022–2025. Large foundation grants to Project 2025 advisory groups and Heritage-related activity are recorded starting 2020 and continuing through 2023 fiscal reports; specific grants—such as a $250,000 Dunn Foundation gift in 2022 and follow-ups in 2023—illustrate year-by-year injections supporting staffing, research, and administrative phases [1] [2]. Heritage’s fiscal 2023 and 2024 filings and program-spending disclosures reveal resources allocated to developing the Project 2025 roadmap, with lobbying and program expenditures reported across 2023–2024 cycles [3] [10]. Opposing PAC donations are concentrated in the 2023–2024 election cycle, aligning with broader electoral activity and counter-messaging campaigns [8] [9].
5. What’s clear, what’s hidden, and why it matters
Available data make two things clear: foundations and wealthy donors are materially financing Project 2025–related work, and the funding timeline spans multiple years from 2020 into 2025 [1] [3]. What remains partially obscured are the precise dollar-for-dollar pathways once funds pass through donor-advised funds and intermediary nonprofits; these entities can mask original donor identity and timing of influence, producing gaps between grant commitments and public disclosure [2] [4]. This funding architecture matters because it shapes strategy—long-term grantmaking to think tanks builds policy infrastructure, while PAC-level spending targets electoral outcomes—so both types of funding are present and operate on different timelines and transparency rules [8] [5].