· Public charity
Laborers Employers Cooperation and Education Trust
The mission is to maximize project opportunities for signatory contractors and job opportunities for liuna members.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 83% of LABORERS EMPLOYERS COOPERATION AND EDUCATION TRUST’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 4 grants below total $65,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $68,800 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $3,800 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LABORERS HEALTH & SAFETY FUND | $30,000 |
| SOLAR ENERGY INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION | $15,000 |
| NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR FAIR CONTRACTING | $10,000 |
| NATIONAL DEMOLITION ASSOCIATION | $10,000 |
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 (FY21–21, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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 +19% since the first grant, against +4% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- TCTRANSPORTATION CALIFORNIA7× · 2017–2023 · $180k · revenue +19%
- LHLABORERS' HEALTH AND SAFETY FUND OF NORTH AMERICA3× · 2023–2025 · $120k · revenue +12%
- NDNATIONAL DEMOLITION ASSOCIATION8× · 2017–2025 · $78k · revenue +46%
Funded once
- LBLABORERS-EMPLOYERS BENEFIT PLAN COLLECTION TRUSTone grant, 2020 · $500k · revenue +4%
- LELABORERS EMPLOYERS COOPERATION AND EDUC TRUST SWone grant, 2024 · $71k · revenue 0%
- AIAMERICAN IRISH HISTORICAL SOCIETY INCone grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +6%
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.
Secure fair compensation and working conditions for all members.
To improve working conditions and living standards of members through collective bargaining, education, training, and employee benefits.
Organize workers for advancement
A fraternal labor organization whose purpose is to promote employment of members in a safe work environment and ensurefair labor practices.
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…
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 promote unity of action in dealing with employers and to coordinate and consolidate the activities of its various affiliated local unions so they can work in a harmonious and united way.
Collective bargaining and representation
The northwest regional organizing coalition (nroc) is established and exists to increase union participation in the industries in which the laborers' international union of north america (liuna!) currently represents workers. it is nroc's…
Labor union
Operation of laborers local union for the benefit of its members.
Provide assistance to member locals with all union related activities.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wisconsin Laborers' District Council and the most unlike its peers is Dc Friends of Ireland. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
18 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. 18 of the 19 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 LABORERS-EMPLOYERS BENEFIT PLAN COLLECTION TRUST ↗
- Who funds TRANSPORTATION CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds LABORERS' HEALTH AND SAFETY FUND OF NORTH AMERICA ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL DEMOLITION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds LABORERS EMPLOYERS COOPERATION AND EDUC TRUST SW ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON IRELAND PROGRAM FOR SERVICE & LEADERSHIP ↗
- Who funds THE NEW ENGLAND LABORERS APPRENTICESHIP ADVANCEMENT FUND ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REGULATORY UTILITY COMMISSIONERS ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT LABOR- MANAGEMENT POLICY COMMITTEE ↗
- Who funds SOLAR ENERGY INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN IRISH HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds TERENCE J O'SULLIVAN LIUNA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR FAIR CONTRACTING ↗
- Who funds DC FRIENDS OF IRELAND ↗
- Who funds WISCONSIN LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds GREATER PROVIDENCE YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND FOUNDATION & ALUMNI ENGAGEMENT ↗
- Who funds LIUNA PACIFIC SOUTHWEST EDUCATION AND EVENTS FUND ↗
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: Laborers' Health and Safety Fund of North America · Great Lakes Region Organizing Committee · Laborers' International Union of North America
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 Laborers Employers Cooperation and Education Trust 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.