Loading this committee’s profile from its FEC filings.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
Loading this committee’s profile from its FEC filings.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
PACs › Super PAC (independent expenditure-only) › 2025–2026
Democratic & progressive groupsOn the Democratic side by their own words, their main funder, or a published source a reviewer cites. A caucus’s PAC is here. A group with one cause is filed under that cause instead.Political groups
57% traces to Democracy Matters, a tax-exempt organization that need not name its donors. See where the money traces to
Super PAC (independent expenditure-only)Washington, District of ColumbiaActive
FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C00871368 · files monthly
Notices dated after Oct 14, 2026 are added; earlier ones are already in the regular reports.
This committee's own pages do not say what it is for. Its largest funder, Democracy Matters, gave 50% of its money this cycle ($5.9M), and describes its purpose:
“Democracy Matters (DM) empowers students by giving them a voice in politics, skills for life-long civic engagement and leadership, and the passion to create a just, fair, and inclusive democracy. Our non-partisan college and high school chapters throughout the country educate, inspire and mobilize other students to take action on a range of issues.
DM opposes threats to and attacks on democracy and democratic institutions. We fight to expand voting rights, defeat the power of big money in politics, and engage in social justice advocacy on issues from climate change, civil rights, gun violence and reproductive rights to educational funding, LGBTQ+ rights, economic justice, healthcare and more.”
Democracy Matters, on its own site, democracymatters.org
Democracy Matters is a tax-exempt organization that does not have to disclose its own donors.
Quoted from the committee's site, or its sponsor's or funder's where its own says nothing. Any side it takes is in its own words. A funder’s share is of this committee’s total receipts, from its itemized FEC filings.
No published list of positions
Each part reads different filings, so counts and totals can differ.
Direct PAC contributions and independent expenditures explicitly reported as support, by the party of the candidate they went to.
Spending against candidates is drawn on its own bar and left out of the support totals.
Contributions are reported money, not endorsements; a PAC giving to both parties is common.
Every contribution on line 23 of the committee’s own Schedule B, which is the filing its summary totals are built from. That line covers federal candidates, party committees and other political committees alike, so a super PAC funding other super PACs appears here rather than under candidate giving.
No contributions itemized
Nothing loaded
Candidate contribution rows come from candidate committee Schedule A filings, the same rows the party chart above counts.
Tap a row with to see who gave.
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 12 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 590 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $22.5M. FEC contributor lists are public records and cannot be used for commercial solicitation.
Total reported receipts $22,506,818
Every dollar the committee reported receiving this cycle, split by the source the FEC filing attributes it to. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
26% to named individuals, 4.4% to organizations, 57% to tax-exempt organizations that need not name their donors, 12% not itemized.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| Organization · tax-exempt organization that need not name its donors · 57% | $12,930,000 |
| 12% | $2,700,818 |
| Organization · 4.4% | $1,000,000 |
| Person · Tech, Anthropic · San Francisco, CA · 3.3% | $750,000 |
| Person · Analyst, Afghanistan WAR Commission · Olympia, WA · also behind 6 other groups · 1.3% | $300,000 |
| Person · Co-President, Sixth Street · San Francisco, CA · 1.2% | $275,000 |
| Person · Retired · San Diego, CA · 1.1% |
Loading the map
Tap or hover over a state, or focus the map and use the arrow keys, to read its total. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 26 contributions · 64% | $14,330,910 |
| 314 contributions · 21% | $4,727,781 |
| 45 contributions · 3.3% | $735,910 |
| 41 contributions · 3% | $679,765 |
| 46 contributions · 2.7% | $606,000 |
Tap a row with to see who was paid.
Total reported disbursements $15,872,434
Every dollar this committee reported spending this cycle, split by the lines it reports against. Open a line to see who was actually paid on it. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
These are the payments the committee itemized, including its independent expenditures, which are filed against the candidate each was for or against rather than as payments to a vendor. Open a category to see which candidates its independent spending went to, and in support or opposition.
Tap a row with to see what was paid for.
$15.9M spent from Jan 2025 to Oct 2026. Most in one report: $5.6M, Oct 1 – Oct 14, 2026.
The running total of what the committee’s FEC reports say it spent, independent expenditures included, with a point at the end of each report. The line is straight between reports because a report gives one total for its whole period. Numbered lines mark the elections that drew the most independent spending. Each expenditure counts toward the next election on its seat after the day it was made, and a seat is named when it drew at least a tenth of that spending.
No lobbying disclosures matched
Project 218 is registered with the Federal Election Commission as a Super PAC (independent expenditure-only). Official FEC summary: Federal Election Commission committee record.
Statements are quoted from these pages exactly. Headings, order and wording are the committee’s or its sponsor’s; the record marking is ours.
No approved organization identity yet
| $250,000 |
| Person · Retired · Boston, MA · also behind 8 other groups · 1.1% | $250,000 |
| Person · Consultant, Millstein & Co. · Washington, DC · 1.1% | $250,000 |
| Person · Executive, Restoration Works · Bentonville, AR · also behind 5 other groups · 1.1% | $250,000 |
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| Person · Burlingame, CA · 0.9% | $200,000 |
| Person · Investor, Self Employed · Naples, FL · 0.9% | $200,000 |
| Person · Investor, Self Employed · San Francisco, CA · 0.9% | $200,000 |
| Person · Technical Staff, Anthropic · Oakland, CA · 0.7% | $150,000 |
| Person · Consultant, Self Employed · New York, NY · 0.7% | $150,000 |
| Person · Bethesda, MD · 0.6% | $130,000 |
35 smaller sources, $2.5M in all (11%), are not listed.
Each committee that gave is followed to where its own money came from, in proportion to what it received: a committee that got half its money from one person is counted as passing half of what it gave on to that person. Each channel shows the committee the money came through and its place in the money tree. It shows who stood behind the money, not what that money was for, and an organization that need not name its donors ends the trail. It stops at a person, an organization, a committee with nothing on file here, or 3committees deep. A person who gave by more than one route appears under each, a name filed two ways may appear twice, and a person's job and city are as they filed them. "Also behind" counts the other groups, among those that moved $100,000 or more into races, in which $100,000 or more traces to the same person, other than those this money came through or went on to.
| $250,000 |
| 11 contributions · 1% | $219,100 |
| 27 contributions · 1% | $216,450 |
By the state each contributor wrote on the filing. The FEC aggregates every Schedule A line together, so one committee or organization transfer can account for a whole state. Contributors who have given $200 or less this cycle are not itemized and cannot be placed on a map. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total.
| Employer as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| 2 contributions · 20% of ranked | $900,000 |
| Written instead of an employer · 51 contributions · 19% of ranked | $865,433 |
| 1 contribution · 6.8% of ranked | $300,000 |
| 2 contributions · 6.2% of ranked | $275,000 |
| 1 contribution · 5.6% of ranked | $250,000 |
| 1 contribution · 5.6% of ranked | $250,000 |
| 1 contribution · 2.3% of ranked | $100,000 |
| 1 contribution · 2.3% of ranked | $100,000 |
A further $18,055,925 came from donors whose answer names no employer (N/A, blank), so it is not ranked. Itemized receipts grouped by the words contributors filed. The FEC aggregates every Schedule A line here, so committee and organization money sits alongside individuals; this is not an industry classification. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($8,958) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an occupation · 367 contributions · 36% of ranked | $3,070,665 |
| Written instead of an occupation · 26 contributions · 11% of ranked | $975,100 |
| 11 contributions · 9.2% of ranked | $782,340 |
| 1 contribution · 8.8% of ranked | $750,000 |
| 19 contributions · 5.5% of ranked | $467,250 |
| 2 contributions · 3.7% of ranked | $320,000 |
| 5 contributions · 3.7% of ranked | $312,000 |
| 2 contributions · 3.2% of ranked | $275,000 |
A further $13,959,910 came from donors whose answer names no occupation (blank), so it is not ranked. Itemized receipts grouped by the words contributors filed. The FEC aggregates every Schedule A line here, so committee and organization money sits alongside individuals; this is not an industry classification. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($8,958) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Total itemized disbursements $15,872,117
Every itemized payment the committee reported this cycle, sorted by what it said each one was for. The categories are ours; the wording they are matched against is the committee’s own. Open a category to read the filed descriptions and who was paid. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
All 274 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 28 payments · 30% of all spending | $4,825,000 |
| 15 payments · 21% of all spending | $3,395,210 |
| 30 payments · 18% of all spending | $2,920,699 |
| 3 payments · 6.9% of all spending | $1,100,000 |
| 30 payments · 6.8% of all spending | $1,081,588 |
| 6 payments · 4.3% of all spending | $687,500 |
| 6 payments · 3.2% of all spending | $507,078 |
| 1 payment · 3.2% of all spending | $500,000 |
The people, firms and committees paid the most, across every kind of payment. Each share is of everything the committee reported spending this cycle, not only the itemized payments above. A payee that is itself a committee links to its own profile.