· Public charity
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 702
Labor union
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 50% of INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL 702’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.
The 5 grants below total $47,750 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $133,549 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $85,799 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 $10k2 grants · $14k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $34k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNION SPORTMENS ALLIANCE | $13,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY ATHLETICS | $10,000 |
| IBEW UNITY FUND | $7,500 |
| ELECTRICAL WORKERS HISTORICAL SOCIETY | $6,750 |
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 (FY23–23, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +34% since the first grant, against +5% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 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, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
- IBINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS7× · 2018–2025 · $99k · revenue +34%
- SISOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION5× · 2021–2025 · $80k · revenue +42%
- EWELECTRICAL WORKERS HISTORICAL SOCIETY5× · 2021–2025 · $31k · revenue +155%
Funded once
- AFAMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONSone grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +24%
- TATHE ALEX AND ALI FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +5%
- FUFLOORBURN U LLCone grant, 2024 · $10k
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.
Labor union - electrical workers
To organize all workers for the economic, moral and social advancement of their condition and status.
To organize all workers for the economic, moral and social advancement of their condition and status.
Labor union
Provide improved wages, fringes benefits and working conditions for members through organizing and collective bargaining
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…
Labor union representing the electrical worker force
Labor council
Labor organization
Labor union of law enforcement officers
Labor union
Representing members in matters of collective bargaining.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations and the most unlike its peers is The Alex and Ali Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 15 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 UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ELECTRICAL WORKERS HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds POSHARD FOUNDATION FOR ABUSED CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds Nubability Athletics Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE ALEX AND ALI FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN IL CENTRAL LABOR COUNCIL ↗
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation
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 International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 702 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.
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.