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 › Independent expenditure filer (person or group) › 2025–2026
Environment & climateGroups that state an environmental or climate purpose, such as the political arm of the League of Conservation Voters.CausesPlaced by our rules or a model’s suggestion, and not yet checked by a person. The money still counts here; a person may move it.
Independent expenditure filer (person or group)Boulder, ColoradoActive
FEC filings through Sep 30, 2026 · FEC bulk filing data · committee C90017898 · files quarterly
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.
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.
No receipts reported
FEC filings through Sep 30, 2026
9% to named individuals, 91% to organizations.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| Organization · 79% | $100,000 |
| Organization · 12% | $15,000 |
| Person · Retired · Philadelphia, PA · 4.2% | $5,264 |
22 smaller sources, $6.1K in all (4.8%), 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.
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 |
|---|---|
| 1 contribution · 79% | $100,000 |
| 1 contribution · 12% | $15,000 |
| 13 contributions · 6.9% | $8,753 |
| 5 contributions · 0.7% | $830 |
| 1 contribution · 0.4% | $527 |
| 1 contribution · 0.2% | $266 |
| 1 contribution · 0.2% | $264 |
Tap a row with to see who was paid.
Total reported disbursements $17,571
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 Sep 30, 2026.
Notices dated after Sep 30, 2026 are added; earlier ones are already in the regular reports.
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.
Besides giving through its PAC, Protect Our Winters Action Fund pays lobbyists to press Congress and federal agencies. Each quarter it, or a firm it hires, files a public report under the Lobbying Disclosure Act saying which topics it worked on, what it spent, and whom it contacted. This is what those reports say.
Each report files its work under official topics. The bar shows how often each topic came up across the reports; open one to read what was filed under it. Naming a bill says the organization lobbied on it, not which side it took.
Each firm reports what this client paid it.
Reported twice a year by the lobbying filer. $1K is political giving that also appears in FEC filings.
Matched by name: these reports are filed for “PROTECT OUR WINTERS ACTION FUND”, found by searching “PROTECT OUR WINTERS ACTION FUND”. Lobbying and FEC records share no ID, so an organization that lobbies under another name is missed. Source: LDA.gov, accessed Nov 9, 2026. Senate Office of Public Records cannot vouch for the data or analyses derived from these data after the data have been retrieved from LDA.gov.
Protect Our Winters Action Fund is registered with the Federal Election Commission as an independent expenditure filer (person or group). Official FEC summary: Federal Election Commission committee record.
No pages quoted
No approved organization identity yet
| $250 |
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 |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an employer · 3 contributions · 17% of ranked | $780 |
| 1 contribution · 11% of ranked | $500 |
| Written instead of an employer · 1 contribution · 11% of ranked | $500 |
| 2 contributions · 10% of ranked | $461 |
| 1 contribution · 5.8% of ranked | $264 |
| 1 contribution · 5.8% of ranked | $264 |
| 1 contribution · 5.8% of ranked | $264 |
| 1 contribution · 5.8% of ranked | $264 |
A further $121,843 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.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an occupation · 9 contributions · 60% of ranked | $6,830 |
| 4 contributions · 7% of ranked | $802 |
| Written instead of an occupation · 1 contribution · 4.6% of ranked | $527 |
| 1 contribution · 4.4% of ranked | $500 |
| 1 contribution · 2.3% of ranked | $266 |
| 1 contribution · 2.3% of ranked | $264 |
| 1 contribution · 2.3% of ranked | $264 |
| 1 contribution · 2.3% of ranked | $264 |
A further $115,000 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.
Total itemized disbursements $17,457
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 Sep 30, 2026.
All 259 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 41 payments | $3,254 |
| 6 payments | $3,066 |
| 13 payments | $2,697 |
| 3 payments | $2,401 |
| 74 payments | $2,397 |
| 4 payments | $2,000 |
| 117 payments | $1,514 |
| 1 payment | $128 |
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.