· Public charity
Amalgamated Transit Union
The object of the international union shall be to organize local unions.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 18 grants below total $800,015 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $872,337 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $72,322 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $35k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $215k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
- $250k+1 grant · $500k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DEVELOPMENT NOW FOR CHICAGO | $500,000 |
| NO ON 2117 | $50,000 |
| CADET AIR CORPS MUSEUM | $25,000 |
| CBTU | $25,000 |
| ONE FAIR WAGE ACTION INC | $25,000 |
| ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE | $25,000 |
| ATU INT'L WOMEN'S CAUCUS | $24,348 |
| THE GWINNETT FUND | $20,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| CONNECT MARICOPA | $20,000 |
| ATU JERRY FUND INC | $11,081 |
| THE RICK SMITH SHOW LLC | $10,000 |
| GROW SMART RHODE ISLAND | $10,000 |
| NY STATE ATU LEGISLATIVE CONFERENCE BOARD | $9,135 |
| INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION LEARNING CENTER | $7,500 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 83% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +47% since the first grant, against +21% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $740k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.
Backed again, and grew
- EPECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE4× · 2022–2025 · $100k · revenue +47%
- JTJOBS TO MOVE AMERICA3× · 2022–2024 · $75k · revenue +20%
- NJNew Jersey State AFL-CIO COPE2× · 2022–2023 · $45k · revenue +203%
Funded once
- CTCOALITION TO PROTECT WORKERS RIGHTSone grant, 2022 · $100k
- MOMOVING ORANGE COUNTY FORWARDone grant, 2023 · $50k
- VYVOTE YES FOR WROKERS RIGHTSone grant, 2023 · $50k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
None
To protect and strengthen the rights and conditions of working people and their families.
Collective bargaining and representation
Promote and protect the interests of the members of the local
The local is a nonprofit organization established to represent its members in wage and fringe benefits matters in the construction industry. the local's primary areas of jurisdiction are oakland and livingston counties.
To improve working conditions and living standards of members through collective bargaining, education, training, and employee benefits.
Union hall devoted to the betterment of members compensation and working conditions, to secure recognition of workers rights to engage in collective bargaining, and to promote the development and maintenance of on-the-job safety practices…
Membership organization representing approximately 570 union members for the purpose of collective bargaining.
Local labor union was established to promote & protect the interests of its membership with regard to social & working conditions encourages a higher standard of skill and employment. the local union is involved in collecive bargaining and…
The work of the union, as the representative of its members, is to provide for the continuous employment of labor, to bring about stable conditions in the industry, and to establish necessary procedures for resolutions of disputes between…
Consistent with our trade union philosophy and tradition of advocating social and economic justice for all, we also see representing the unemployed, under-employed, and low income people as part of our mission. whether organized or yet to…
Labor union
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is One Fair Wage Inc and the most unlike its peers is Atu Jerry Fund Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 17 of the 30 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds DEVELOPMENT NOW FOR CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds JOBS TO MOVE AMERICA ↗
- Who funds COALITION OF BLACK TRADE UNIONISTS ↗
- Who funds No on 2117 Committee ↗
- Who funds AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION ↗
- Who funds New Jersey State AFL-CIO COPE ↗
- Who funds LABOR COUNCIL FOR LATIN AMERICAN ADVANCEMENT ↗
- Who funds Cadet Air Corps Museum ↗
- Who funds ONE FAIR WAGE INC ↗
- Who funds THE GWINNETT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds A PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds ATU JERRY FUND INC ↗
- Who funds RIDERS ALLIANCE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds GROW SMART RHODE ISLAND ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION LEARNING CENTER ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY LABOR UNITED INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Communications Workers of America Afl-Cio Clc · International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers · United Steel Paper and Forestry Rubber Manufacturing Energy Allied · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · United Food and Commercial Workers International Union · Tides Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Amalgamated Transit Union funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- International Transportation Learning Center — 100% of income from government
- Amalgamated Transit Union — 17% of income from government
- Community Labor United Inc — 0% of income from government
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.