· Public charity
American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees
The american federation of state, county and municipal employees (afscme)is an international labor organization representing workers in the public service and health care sectors.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 70% of AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k12 grants · $79k
- $10k–50k60 grants · $1.1M
- $50k–250k52 grants · $5.1M
- $250k+11 grants · $7.8M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| For Our Future Action Fund | $4,000,000 |
| America Votes | $900,000 |
| Development Now For Chicago | $550,000 |
| ProgressNow | $400,000 |
| AFL-CIO Secretary Treasurer | $388,000 |
| NAACP | $280,000 |
| One APIA Nevada | $250,000 |
| Citizens Not Politicians | $250,000 |
| Strategic Victory Fund | $250,000 |
| Organizing Empowerment Project Inc | $250,000 |
| PA Alliance Action | $250,000 |
| Make The Road Action Inc | $235,000 |
| Center For American Progress | $225,000 |
| Black Men Vote Civic Action Fund | $225,000 |
| Democracy Alliance | $220,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $310k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those 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 +15% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
111 repeat relationships — 59 still active in FY2024, 52 since wound down; 71 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 57% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6.0M 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
- FOFOR OUR FUTURE ACTION FUND7× · 2017–2024 · $17M · revenue +86% · 26% of their budget
- WAWORKING AMERICA6× · 2017–2024 · $4.4M · revenue +187%
- PNPROGRESS NOW INC7× · 2018–2024 · $2.2M · revenue +693%
Funded once
- TFTHE FILM FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2017 · $500k · revenue +4% · 25% of their budget
- SVState Victory Fund LLCone grant, 2017 · $500k
- TGThe Good Land Committee Incone grant, 2019 · $500k
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.
To protect and strengthen the rights and conditions of working people and their families.
Supports Measure to Remove Lawmakers Power to Set Their Own Pay
The nonpartisan campaign legal center advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every american's rights to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic…
Afl-cio union lawyers alliance was established to better the conditions of working men and women and their families by enhancing the quality of legal representation that is available to the afl-cio and the national and international unions…
To provide information about public policy and national policy alternatives to leaders in business, government, religion, and academia.
American workers for progress works to ensure that leaders at every level are focused on reducing barriers to job growth and addressing economic challenges to guarantee a better future for all americans.
The foundation works to defend and promote the constitution of the united states, focusing especially on the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth, and 14th amendments. the foundation also works to defend and promote the constitution of the…
Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.
The american civil liberties union of arizona is the state's premier guardian of liberty working through the arizona legislature and communities statewide to defend and preserve individual rights and freedoms guaranteed to all by the…
To organize all workers for the economic, moral and social advancement of their condition and status.
The mission of the afl-cio is to improve the lives of working families, to bring economic justice to the workplace and social justice to our nation.
Organize general election presidential and vice-presidential debates
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Organizing Empowerment Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is Heartland Research Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 27 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
241 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. 241 of the 327 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 FOR OUR FUTURE ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds WORKING AMERICA ↗
- Who funds STRATEGIC VICTORY FUND ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS ↗
- Who funds PROGRESS NOW INC ↗
- Who funds BALLOT INITIATIVE STRATEGY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds National Public Pension Coalition ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ↗
- Who funds America Votes ↗
- Who funds A BETTER WISCONSIN TOGETHER INC ↗
- Who funds BBT INC ↗
- Who funds CITIZENS FOR TAX JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds EPI ACTION ↗
- Who funds POWERSWITCH ACTION ↗
- Who funds PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds STATE INNOVATION EXCHANGE ↗
- Who funds SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES FIRST ↗
- Who funds Jobs with Justice Education Fund ↗
- Who funds DEVELOPMENT NOW FOR CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ACTION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds THE FILM FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds The Good Land Committee Inc ↗
- Who funds STATE LEADERSHIP PROJECT ↗
- Who funds AMERICA WORKS USA ↗
- Who funds SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND ↗
- Who funds FLORIDIANS FOR TAX FAIRNESS ↗
- Who funds Ohio Progressive Collaborative ↗
- Who funds Repairers of the Breach ↗
- Who funds GOOD JOBS FIRST ↗
- Who funds THE LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds ORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds Fair Elections Center ↗
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: National Education Association of the United States · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Communications Workers of America Afl-Cio Clc · Open Society Action Fund Inc · American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations · America Votes · Way to Win Action Fund Inc · Tides Advocacy · State Engagement Fund · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · United Food and Commercial Workers International Union · North 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 American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% 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.