· Public charity
Laborers Local 1076 Employers Coop and Education Trust
Promote and sponsor education of issues that affect the construction industry.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 65% of Laborers Local 1076 Employers Coop 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 $59,143 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $102,368 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $43,225 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 |
|---|---|
| LIUNA Local 1076 | $25,900 |
| Pontiac Middle School | $13,243 |
| MI LABORERS SCHOLARSHIP FD | $10,000 |
| T J OSULLIVAN LIUNA CHAR FDN | $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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of your 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.
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 +31% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 3 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, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k 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
- LILABORERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA - LOCAL 10763× · 2023–2025 · $74k · revenue +14%
- MLMICHIGAN LABORERS SCHOLARSHIP FUND4× · 2022–2025 · $40k · revenue +88%
- MIMICHIGAN INFRASTRUCTURE & TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION4× · 2018–2023 · $31k · revenue +31%
Funded once
- MLMichigan Laborers-Employers Cooperation and Educatone grant, 2024 · $28k · revenue +12%
- JWJOHN WILLIAM HALE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue +7%
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.
Collective bargaining and representation
Consistent with our trade union philosophy and tradition of advocating social and economic justice for all, we also see representing the unemployed, under-employed, and low income people as part of our mission. whether organized or yet to…
To represent and advocate for its member physicians.
To provide education, training, and related benefits to eligible participants of the fund, through a taft hartley collectively barganined agreement.
Promote and protect the interests of the members of the local
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…
Represents its members when dealing with the state of Delaware and other employment related matters.
Improvement of Workers Conditions, wages and benefits
Operation of laborers local union for the benefit of its members.
To provide scholarships for families of local union members.
Local 18 iuoe is a labor organization that has been instrumental in negotiating progressive contracts for the residential & heavy highway & building industry.
Labor union
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Michigan Infrastructure & Transportation Association and the most unlike its peers is John William Hale Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
8 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. 8 of the 9 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 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA - LOCAL 1076 ↗
- Who funds TERENCE J O'SULLIVAN LIUNA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN LABORERS SCHOLARSHIP FUND ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN INFRASTRUCTURE & TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Michigan Laborers-Employers Cooperation and Educat ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF CONSTRUCTORS DBA AGC OF MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds JOHN WILLIAM HALE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Pontiac School District Promise Zone Authority Boa ↗
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Laborers Local 1076 Employers Coop 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Laborers Local 1076 Employers Coop and Education Trust?
Find your warmest path to Laborers Local 1076 Employers Coop and Education Trust through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.