How much did INTERNATIONAL ASSN OF SMART NO 104 grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 70% of INTERNATIONAL ASSN OF SMART NO 104’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

yesissuespayeducationallabor unionactivitiespolitical

2019

advocacytreatmentengagewomenbaylabor unionconstruction

2020

yes measurecommitteeproppoliticaltradeslabor unionworkers

2021

labor union

2022

donation-laborcivicaffordableneighborscal fireballot measurealameda

2023

energydonation-laborceastandardscalifornia'scivicholiday

2024

donations-laborhealthdonations-civicreliefballot measurespecialtrade

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k11 grants · $74k
$10k–50k11 grants · $152k
$50k–250k1 grant · $100k

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

$102M

Total assets

Largest grants

YES ON PROP 1-GOV NEWSOM'S BALLOT MEASURE COMM$100,000
SMART DISASTER RELIEF FUND$25,000
YES ON PROP 2-CALIFORNIANS FOR QUALITY SCHOOLS$20,000
SAN FRANCISCO BCTC POWER PAC$20,000
UNITED LABOR AGENCY OF NEVADA$14,104
HEAVY METAL SUMMER EXPERIENCE$11,600
SMW 104 JATC$11,308
WESTERN STATES COUNCIL$10,000
SAN FRANCISCO BCTC$10,000
NEMI$10,000
YES ON PROP 4$10,000
SAN DIEGO ALLIANCE FOR TRAFFIC RELIEF$10,000
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BCTC$8,500
MONTEREY-SANTA CRUZ BCTC$8,000
FRIENDS OF CENTRAL FIRE DISTRICT YES ON R$7,500

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY18–21, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9% — the area typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 9% of INTERNATIONAL ASSN OF SMART NO 104’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 84% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 76% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

INTERNATIONAL ASSN OF SMART NO 104lessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

25%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$469k · 17 repeat orgs$1.4M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +27% since the first grant, against +7% for the ones you funded once.

17 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$469k

$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%

+7%

Still filing today

71%

27%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 17% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $272k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

EducationHealthEmploymentCommunity ImprovementPublic Safety & DisasterPhilanthropyOther

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

TC
THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATIVE LATINO CAUCUS FOUNDATIO
6× · 2018–2023 · $60k · revenue +96%
WORKING PARTNERSHIPS USA
4× · 2018–2023 · $43k · revenue +183%
CL
CC LABOR TO LABOR
4× · 2018–2021 · $33k · revenue +97%

Funded once

SD
SMART DISASTER RELIEF FUNDgraduated
one grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue +26%
CF
Committee for An Affordable and Resilient Berkeley
one grant, 2022 · $50k
SF
San Francisco BCTC POWER PIC
one grant, 2022 · $50k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Californians for Fair Pay and Employer

To support policies and ballot measures to support employment reform.

—

California Teachers Association-Smuhsdta

Labor union

—

Sacramento-Sierras Building &

The council was organized to promote the growth and development of all building and construction trades and organized labor within its jurisdiction.

—

California Teachers Association-Ssfcta

Labor union

—

California State Council of Service

Coordinate affiliated local unions to better the working conditions of its members.

—

Coalition for Responsible and Equitable

To ensure that the workers in the construction industry in Los Angeles are highly trained and professional. The organization seeks the creation of good jobs, safety for workers, health care and a secure retirement for working families.

Community Improvement

North Valley Labor Federation

The North Valley Labor Federations mission is to grow and strengthen the labor movement and build a strong political voice for working families in the Northern San Joaquin Valley.

—

Caliifornia Green Building Council

Usgbc california is the local chapter of the united states green building council, inc., formed in 2002 by professionals representing various sectors of the construction industry, ranging from engineers and architects to designers and…

Environment

Southern California Contractors

To promote and represent union contractors, inform them about issues affecting the industry and provide the members with support services and peer networks that will help them to succeed.

—

Alameda County Prosecutors Association

Alameda county prosecutors association is a labor association that represents the employment interests of deputy district attorneys (including senior deputy district attorneys, also known as assistant district attorneys) employed in the…

Employment

California Alliance for Jobs

To enhance and develop unionized construction work in Northern California.

—

San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council Afl-Cio

The Labor Council offers an avenue for local unions to come together as one group.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Contra Costa Building and Construction and the most unlike its peers is Smart Td Disaster Relief Fund. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 24 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/54

the rest of the field

11%

6,022/57,038

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.

06the grantee network

48 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

39/48

Grantees still filing

32/48

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$1,372,364Employment$169,399Education$126,900Health$73,604Community Improvement$57,351Human Services$35,000Public Safety & Disaster$35,000

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.

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.

Northern California Carpenters RegionalCA18× affinity6 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Northern California Carpenters Regional · Sprinkler Fitters Local 483 · United Assoc of Journeymen & PPF 342 · Sheet Metal Workers Local 19 Association · American Federation of Labor And · The Heising-Simons Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 organisation INTERNATIONAL ASSN OF SMART NO 104 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: SMART DISASTER RELIEF FUND.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 13.2× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 203772185 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on SMART DISASTER RELIEF FUND, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 41% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to International Assn of Smart No 104?

Find your warmest path to International Assn of Smart No 104 through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

INTERNATIONAL ASSN OF SMART NO 104

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

48 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to International Assn of Smart No 104?

More from the funding graph

INTERNATIONAL ASSN OF SMART NO 104

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

48 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to International Assn of Smart No 104?

More from the funding graph