· Public charity
Legal Aid at Work
Legal Aid at Work partners with people to help them understand and assert their workplace rights.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 8 grants below total $105,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $187,077 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $82,077 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 |
|---|---|
| Watsonville Law Center | $15,000 |
| Refugee & Immigrant Transitio | $15,000 |
| Chinese Progressive Associati | $15,000 |
| Burma Refugee Families & Newc | $15,000 |
| Korean Immigrant Workers Adv | $12,500 |
| Warehouse Worker Resource Cen | $12,500 |
| Project Sentinel | $10,000 |
| United Way of Stanislaus Cont | $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 (FY17–24, $141k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% 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.
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 +36% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 88% 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
- CFCENTER FOR WORKERS' RIGHTS4× · 2017–2022 · $248k · revenue +38%
THE WATSONVILLE LAW CENTER4× · 2021–2024 · $80k · revenue +107%- WWWarehouse Worker Resource Center2× · 2021–2024 · $79k · revenue +23%
Funded once
- JMJAKARA MOVEMENTone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -52%
- MCMERCED COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL INCgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +30%
- CPCOMMUNITY PARTNERSgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +32%
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.
La Raza Centro Legal San Francisco provides high quality, highly trusted, free legal services to low-income or immigrant clients in the San Francisco Bay Area.
The California Center for Movement Legal Services (Movement Legal) provides legal services in the pursuit of improving the lives of California's traditionally underserved residents, carrying out legal work that fosters community led policy…
A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…
Fuerza Laboral is a workers' rights center whose mission is to shift the balance of power in our economy in favor of workers by educating, training, and organizing workers to become community leaders; taking direct action to recover unpaid…
Legal Link removes legal barriers that prolong poverty by adding critically needed capacity to the legal ecosystem.
Centro Legal De La Raza is a comprehensive legal services agency protecting and advancing the rights of low-income immigrant communities throguh culturally competent bilingual legal representation, education, and advocacy.
California Alliance of Caregivers represents the voices of relative and non-relative caregivers to promote the well-being of children in foster care. California Alliance of Caregivers provides training information support and advocacy for…
Asian Immigrant Women Advocates empowers low-income, limited English speaking immigrant women and youth through education, leadership development and civic participation programs.
To advance the human & civil rights of immigrants & refugees in los angeles; promote harmonious multi-ethnic human relations.
Legal Aid
In 2024, Inner City Law Center, ICLC, served over 3,400 people, helping vulnerable Angelenos to remain in their homes and recover nearly $20.5 million in financial benefits.
Provide Educational Programs, Health Services and Legal Services to Farm Workers at housing sites and throughout the Salinas Valley and promote improved living conditions.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chinese Progressive Association and the most unlike its peers is Merced County Arts Council Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 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.
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 CENTER FOR WORKERS' RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds THE WATSONVILLE LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds Warehouse Worker Resource Center ↗
- Who funds BAY AREA RESOURCE FOR NEWCOMERS ↗
- Who funds CHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Refugee & Immigrant Transitions ↗
- Who funds United Way of Stanislaus County ↗
- Who funds PROJECT SENTINEL INC ↗
- Who funds Centro Laboral de Graton ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID SOCIETY OF SAN BERNARDINO INC ↗
- Who funds KOREAN IMMIGRANT WORKERS ADVOCATES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds JAKARA MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds MERCED COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds SMALL BUSINESS MAJORITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY CAREGIVER ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds CASA FAMILIAR INC ↗
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: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The James Irvine Foundation · The California Endowment · Impactassetsinc · Asian Law Caucus · Sierra Health Foundation Center for Health Program Management · Tides Center · East Bay Community Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · California Community Foundation · Local Initiatives Support Corporation
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 Legal Aid at Work 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.