Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Laborers International Union of Na Great Plains Laborers' District Council

Provide assistance to member locals with all union related activities.

$334k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$120k
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: 99% of LABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NA GREAT PLAINS LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL’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 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 5 grants below total $311,300 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $334,230 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $22,930 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

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $11k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $300k
$60,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$4.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LABORERS LOCAL #620$120,000
LABORERS LOCAL #43$60,000
LABORERS LOCAL #177$60,000
LABORERS LOCAL #751$60,000
MIDWEST REGION VETERANS COMMITTEE$11,300
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 64% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%LABORERS LOCAL #1140: $50k → 12%IOWA LABORERS' EDUCATION AND TRAINING TRUST FUND: $50k → 6%LABORERS LOCAL #43: $70k → 9%LABORERS LOCAL #177: $70k → 10%MIDWEST REGION VETERANS COMMITTEE: $11k → 11%LABORERS LOCAL #362: $70k → 11%LABORERS LOCAL #751: $60k → 14%LABORERS LOCAL #165: $100k → 14%LABORERS LOCAL #309: $67k → 15%LABORERS LOCAL #620: $120k → 9%LABORERS LOCAL #1140: $50k → 12%LABORERS LOCAL #43: $60k → 9%LABORERS LOCAL #177: $60k → 10%LABORERS LOCAL #165: $50k → 14%LABORERS LOCAL #620: $50k → 9%LABORERS LOCAL #1140: $50k → 12%LABORERS LOCAL #43: $50k → 9%IOWA LECET: $50k → 10%LABORERS LOCAL #1140: $40k → 12%LABORERS LOCAL #43: $50k → 9%LABORERS LOCAL #177: $50k → 10%LABORERS LOCAL #1140: $25k → 12%LABORERS LOCAL #43: $50k → 9%LABORERS LOCAL #177: $50k → 10%LABORERS LOCAL #1140: $25k → 12%LABORERS LOCAL #43: $40k → 9%LABORERS LOCAL #177: $50k → 10%LABORERS LOCAL #1140: $10k → 12%LABORERS LOCAL #43: $24k → 9%LABORERS LOCAL #177: $40k → 10%LABORERS LOCAL #43: $10k → 9%IOWA LECET: $50k → 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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.3M · 6 repeat orgs$258k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +43% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
3

Total granted

$1.3M
$187k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+35%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $71k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

  • LI
    LABORERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LABORERS' LOCAL #43
    8× · 2017–2024 · $354k · revenue +121%
  • LI
    LABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA
    7× · 2017–2023 · $250k · revenue +34%
  • LI
    LABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL 620
    2× · 2023–2024 · $170k · revenue +149% · 49% of their budget

Funded once

  • LA
    LABORERS AFL-CIO LOCAL UNION 362graduated
    one grant, 2017 · $70k · revenue +55%
  • LI
    LABORER'S INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH A
    one grant, 2017 · $67k · revenue +7%
  • IL
    IOWA LABORERS' EDUCATION AND TRAINING TRUST FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue +35%

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
Laborers International Union of North America Local 152

Labor union

—
2
Laborers International Union of 341 Hcl

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…

—
3
Laborers International Union of North America - Local 1076

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.

—
4
Laborers International Union of North America Local Union 44

Provide benefits of union membership

—
5
Laborers International Union of Na Great Plains Laborers' District Council

Provide assistance to member locals with all union related activities.

—
6
Laborers International Union of State of Mi

Collective bargaining and representation

—
7
Laborers' International Union of North America Local No 5

Labor union

—
8
Laborers' International Union of North America

To improve working conditions and living standards of members through collective bargaining, education, training, and employee benefits.

—
9
Laborers International Union of North America Local 872

To provide continuous employment, collectively bargain for improvement of working conditions and wages.

—
10
Laborers International Union of Na Sewer and Tunnel Miners Union Local 2

Secure fair compensation and working conditions for all members.

—
11
Laborers International Union of North America

Represents its members when dealing with the state of Delaware and other employment related matters.

—
12
Laborers' Int'l Union of North America District Council of Chicago

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.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Laborers' International Union of North America Laborers' Local #43 and the most unlike its peers is Iowa Laborers' Education and Training Trust Fund. 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

11 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

LABORERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LABORERS' LOCAL #43 — $354,000 · OtherLABORERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LABORERS' LOCAL #43CONSTRUCTION AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES LIUNA LOCAL #177 — $320,000 · OtherCONSTRUCTION AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES LIUNA LOCAL #177LABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA — $250,000 · OtherLABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICALABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL 620 — $170,000 · OtherLABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL 620LABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL #165 — $150,000 · OtherLABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL #165IOWA LABORERS' EMPLOYERS COOPERATION & EDUCATION TRUST — $100,000 · OtherIOWA LABORERS' EMPLOYERS COOPERATION & EDUCATION TRUSTLABORERS AFL-CIO LOCAL UNION 362 — $70,000 · OtherLABORER'S INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH A — $67,000 · OtherLABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL #751 — $60,000 · Other+1 more — $50,000 · OtherMIDWEST REGION LABORERS VETERANS COMMITTEE — $11,300 · Public Benefit
Other$1,591,000Public Benefit$11,300

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetLABORERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LABORERS' LOCAL #43 — $354,000 over 8y, 7.1% of budgetCONSTRUCTION AND PUBLIC EMPLOYEES LIUNA LOCAL #177 — $320,000 over 6y, 3.2% of budgetLABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA — $250,000 over 7y, 4.0% of budgetLABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL 620 — $170,000 over 2y, 49% of budgetLABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL #165 — $150,000 over 2y, 7.0% of budgetIOWA LABORERS' EMPLOYERS COOPERATION & EDUCATION TRUST — $100,000 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetLABORERS AFL-CIO LOCAL UNION 362 — $70,000 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetLABORER'S INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH A — $67,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetLABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA LOCAL #751 — $60,000 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetIOWA LABORERS' EDUCATION AND TRAINING TRUST FUND — $50,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetMIDWEST REGION LABORERS VETERANS COMMITTEE — $11,300 over 1y, 3.5% 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.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Laborers International Union of Na Great Plains Laborers' District Council 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%3%13%28%50%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
    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 11 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