similar sites

Browse

AI Report Tools

Sites similar to irgaction.com

Irgaction alternatives & similar sites

IRG Action Fund - Reforms. Actions. Results. — 18 websites ranked by shared content topics, category and on-page relevance.

Each result shows its full tech stack, contacts and AI-policy — not just a name · Browse all sites in Non Profit Organizations →

Domain	Match	Title	Country/Lang	Category	AI files	Contact	AI-protection
afaaction.net ↗	69 match 1 shared topics	AFA Action	United States~ en	non-profit-organizations	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
ahrraf.org ↗	67 match 1 shared topics	American Human Rights Restoration Action Fund	en	non-profit-organizations WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
afredfund.org ↗	66 match 1 shared topics	Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund	en	non-profit-organizations WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
afipakistan.org ↗	66 match 1 shared topics	Home - Action for Impact	en	non-profit-organizations WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
charityauctions.com ↗	66 match 1 shared topics	CharityAuctions \| Nonprofit Auction & Fundraising Platform	en	non-profit-organizations	robots llmsaihumans	emailphone	none
higheredpartnerships.org ↗	66 match 1 shared topics	Higher Education Partnerships • Transformational Partnerships Fund	en	non-profit-organizations WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
charitableaction.com ↗	66 match 1 shared topics	Charitable Action – Actions Speak Louder Than Words	en	non-profit-organizations WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
functionalexpenses.com ↗	66 match 1 shared topics	Functional Expenses - How to Report on Functional Expenses	en	non-profit-organizations WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
missionfundingsolutions.com ↗	66 match 1 shared topics	Home - Mission Funding Solutions	en	non-profit-organizations WordPress WooCommerce	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
dontmesswithtexasparents.com ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	Institute for Justice \| Action Center	en	non-profit-organizations	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
civstudies.org ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	The Institute for Civilizational Studies: Preserving Indigenous Knowledge and Education \| CivStudies Foundation	en	non-profit-organizations	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
fyrefund.com ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	Home - Fundraising and Donation solutions by fYreFund	en	non-profit-organizations WordPress WooCommerce	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
earlieaction.org ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	Earlie Action	en	non-profit-organizations	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
afdan.org ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	AFDAN - African Develepment Action Network	en	non-profit-organizations WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
palantirfoundation.com ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	The Palantir Foundation for Defense Policy & International Affairs	en	non-profit-organizations	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
palantirprize.com ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	The Palantir Foundation for Defense Policy & International Affairs	en	non-profit-organizations	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
helpfund529.com ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	Help Fund 529 - Recruiting for Good	en	non-profit-organizations WordPress	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none
hogannewtonfund.org ↗	65 match 1 shared topics	The Hogan-Newton Fund	en	non-profit-organizations Webflow	robotsllmsaihumans	emailphone	none

How the match score works

Each match is a 0–100 similarity score — the higher it is, the more two sites resemble one another. It’s computed automatically from our own crawl data (never from what a site says about itself) by combining several independent signals, so a high score means several of them point the same way:

shared topics how many of the same fine‑grained content topics (IAB sub‑categories) both sites cover — the main signal.
same category whether they sit in the same business / industry category.
content & title how closely their titles and page descriptions line up in wording and meaning.

No single signal decides the result — they’re blended together. Treat the score as a way to rank candidates rather than an absolute percentage; the chips on each result show which signals contributed.