Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Public charity

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union 6

To organize workers for the economic, moral and social advancement of individuals employed within the electrical industry.

$172k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 88% of INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL UNION 6’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.

02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 7 grants below total $110,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $171,864 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $61,364 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $55k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$14M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
IBEW-COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL EDUCATION (COPE)$50,000
IBEW Local 46$15,000
IBEW Unity Fund$10,000
SFLC Worker Relief Fund$10,000
Great Schools for All SFUSD Kids$10,000
Yes on L Fund the Bus$10,000
SF Parks Alliance$5,500
02The need
03

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 (FY18–22, $24k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%SF FIRE FIGHTERS' TOY PROGRAM: $6k → 10%SF FIRE FIGHTERS' TOY PROGRAM: $5k → 10%SF FIRE FIGHTERS' TOY PROGRAM: $5k → 10%SF Firefighters' Toy Program: $7k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein 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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

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.

16%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$112k · 3 repeat orgs$575k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
22

Total granted

$112k
$470k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-65%
0%

Still filing today

100%
27%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 5% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $105k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesEducationReligionCommunity ImprovementRecreation & SportsPhilanthropyOther

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

  • SF
    San Francisco Labor Council
    3× · 2018–2021 · $67k · revenue +96%
  • SF
    SAN FRANCISCO FIRE FIGHTERS' TOY PROGRAM
    4× · 2018–2022 · $24k · revenue -73%
  • SF
    SAN FRANCISCO PARKS ALLIANCE
    3× · 2019–2024 · $21k · revenue -65%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $75k
  • IL
    IBEW Local union 6 Political Account
    one grant, 2022 · $56k
  • CT
    Coalition to Protect Riders and Drivers sponsored by the CA Labor Federation AFL-CIO
    one grant, 2020 · $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.

1
Sf for Muni Accountability and Reliable Service - No on Prop L

To oppose ballot measure Additional Business Tax on Transportation Network Companies and Autonomous Vehicle Businesses to Fund Public Transportation in San Francisco, CA.

—
2
Better Roads and Transit Yes on L

Run a campaign to support a 2022 ballot measure that provides for a tax increase to fund projects that improve transportation in San Francisco.

—
3
Sf Partnership

SF Partnership is an organization comprised of SF's leading employers dedicated to supporting an equitable, resilient, and vibrant economy shared by all people working and living in San Francisco. Through education, advocacy, and research,…

—
4
Coalition to Grow San Francisco - Grow Sf

The Organization exists to educate and engage the public on policy issues through public outreach and educational activities, encouraging civic participation, leading public policy discussions, and supporting projects to develop solutions.

Civil Rights
5
Yes on Prop E for a Safer Sf Mayor Breeds Ballot Measure Committee

The mission of the committee is to run a campaign in support of San Francisco Proposition E Safer San Francisco 2024 on the ballot for March 5, 2024. The measure will remove obstacles that have been put in place that prevent San Francisco…

—
6
San Francisco Bicycle Coalition

The mission of San Francisco Bicycle Coalition is to transform San Francisco's streets and neighborhoods into more livable and safe places by promoting the bicycle for everyday transportation.

Environment
7
Revitalize San Francisco

To support a business tax reform measure on San Francisco's November 2024 ballot.

—
8
Save San Francisco Small Businesses - No On F

Oppose payroll expense tax ballot measure in the city and county of san francisco

—
9
United Educators of San Francisco

Collective bargaining representation

—
10
Abundant San Francisco

To support effective government policies in San Francisco

—
11
Californians for Fair Pay and Employer Accountability

To support policies and ballot measures to support employment reform.

—
12
Sf Forward

To oppose and support local ballot measures in San Francisco.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is San Francisco Fire Fighters Local 798 Surviving Families Fund and the most unlike its peers is Rebuild City College Yes on a. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

19 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. 19 of the 31 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/19
Grantees still filing
5/19
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Individual grant recipient — $75,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSan Francisco Labor Council — $67,000 · OtherSan Francisco Labor CouncilIBEW Local union 6 Political Account — $56,000 · OtherIBEW Local union 6 Political AccountCoalition to Protect Riders and Drivers sponsored by the CA Labor Federation AFL-CIO — $50,000 · OtherCoalition to Protect Riders and Drivers sponsored by the CA Labor Federation AFL-CIOIBEW ILLINOIS PAC — $50,000 · OtherIBEW ILLINOIS PACBetter Roads and Transit — $50,000 · OtherBetter Roads and TransitHawaii State Assoc of Electrical Workers — $25,000 · OtherCommittee to Save Caltrain Yes on Measure RR — $25,000 · OtherIBEW PAC EDUCATION FUND — $25,000 · OtherCommittee for Safer Streets and Reliable Accessible Transportation — $25,000 · Other+15 more — $157,500 · Other+15 moreSAN FRANCISCO FIRE FIGHTERS' TOY PROGRAM — $23,712 · Human ServicesSAN FRANCISCO PARKS ALLIANCE — $21,000 · Recreation & SportsSan Francisco Transit Riders — $10,000 · Community ImprovementSAN FRANCISCO FIRE FIGHTERS LOCAL 798 SURVIVING FAMILIES FUND — $10,000 · PhilanthropyGLIDE FOUNDATION — $10,000 · ReligionTHE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION SAN FRANCISCO STATE — $6,500 · Education
Other$605,500Human Services$23,712Recreation & Sports$21,000Community Improvement$10,000Philanthropy$10,000Religion$10,000Education$6,500

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetSan Francisco Labor Council — $67,000 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetCoalition to Protect Riders and Drivers sponsored by the CA Labor Federation AFL-CIO — $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCommittee to Save Caltrain Yes on Measure RR — $25,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCommittee for Safer Streets and Reliable Accessible Transportation — $25,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO FIRE FIGHTERS' TOY PROGRAM — $23,712 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO PARKS ALLIANCE — $21,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetIntl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No 46 — $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS — $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYes on L Fund the Bus — $10,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetSan Francisco Transit Riders — $10,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetGreat Schools for All SF Kids Yes on Prop A — $10,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetNATIONAL RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGLIDE FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRebuild City College Yes on A — $10,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetSF CLOUT — $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetSan Franciscans for Fire Earthquake and Disaster Preparedness Sponsored by the San Francisco Firefighters Local 798 — $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetROMERO INSTITUTE — $7,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY CORPORATION SAN FRANCISCO STATE — $6,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA4.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Union 6 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 31 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines