Skip to content
National Nurses United at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

National Nurses United

National Nurses United (NNU) is a 501(c)(5) organization with the primary mission of providing effective collective bargaining representation to NNU affiliates in order to promote the economic and professional interests of direct care nurses and to advocate for direct care nurses and their patients on all public policy matters related to…

$601k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$2.0MPublic Benefit$610kCivil Rights$406kCommunity Improvement$310kEmployment$275kHealth$234kHuman Services$110kMembership Benefit$71kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $525,524, the rows itemized in this filing. The $600,731 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $75,207 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $98k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $172k
  • $250k+1 grant · $250k
$15,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$56M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Development Now for Chicago$250,000
Rutgers University$172,024
Labor Community Services of Los Angeles$25,000
Middle East Children's Alliance$25,000
AFL-CIO Technology Institute$15,000
DC Jobs with Justice$12,500
Pension Rights Center$10,000
Union Veterans Council$10,000
AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer$6,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY25–25, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Labor Community Services of Los Angeles: $25k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

VT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
IA
PA
NJ
CA
MO
KY
VA
MD
NM
DC
LA
GA
TX
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.9M · 14 repeat orgs$1.4M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +4% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
38

Total granted

$2.9M
$1.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+4%
0%

Still filing today

79%
87%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 40% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $315k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsInternationalEducationCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitHealthOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • AMERICAN UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2017–2019 · $522k · revenue +26%
  • HI
    HEALTHCARE-NOW INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $121k · revenue +7%
  • PR
    Pension Rights Center
    8× · 2018–2025 · $110k · revenue +29%

Funded once

  • NEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC
    one grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue -88%
  • TM
    TAKEACTION MINNESOTA
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue -48%
  • BC
    BVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue +79%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
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…

—
2
Afl-Cio Union Lawyers Alliance

Afl-cio union lawyers alliance was established to better the conditions of working men and women and their families by enhancing the quality of legal representation that is available to the afl-cio and the national and international unions…

—
3
International Union of Operating Engineers Local 825ABCDRRH

The work of the union, as the representative of its members, is to provide for the continuous employment of labor, to bring about stable conditions in the industry, and to establish necessary procedures for resolutions of disputes between…

—
4
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.

—
5
Laborers' International Union of North America

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

—
6
Laborers International Union of State of Mi

Collective bargaining and representation

—
7
United Food and Commercial Workers International Union

To organize all workers for the economic, moral, and social advancement of their condition and status.

Employment
8
Laborers' International Union of North America Laborers' Local #43

Promote and protect the interests of the members of the local

—
9
International Union of Operating Engineers' Local 324

To anticipate for, and capitalize on the ever-changing economic, social, political and legal challenges facing our union; to provide an unmatched level of services to members through a dedicated, loyal team of professionals.

—
10
Laborers International Union of Na

Improvements to conditions of workers

—
11
Cincinnati Afl-Cio Labor Council

The mission of the afl-cio is to improve the lives of working families, to bring economic justice to the workplace and social justice to our nation.

—
12
Laborers International Union of North America 1322 Hcl

Membership organization representing approximately 570 union members for the purpose of collective bargaining.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Actors' Fund of America; the most unlike its peers is American University. 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

50 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 50 of the 56 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
48/50
Grantees still filing
24/50
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RUTGERS THE STATE UNIVERSITY: $673,080 · OtherRUTGERS THE STATE UNIVERSITYCONSUMER WATCHDOG CAMPAIGN: $175,000 · OtherCONSUMER WATCHDOG CAMPAIGNPROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS OF AMERICA: $120,000 · OtherPROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS OF AMERICAAMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS: $96,000 · OtherAMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS …UNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA: $60,000 · Other+24 more: $450,925 · Other+24 moreRUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $791,638 · EducationRUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIONAMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $522,333 · EducationAMERICAN UNIVERSITY+2 more: $23,000 · EducationPension Rights Center: $110,300 · Civil RightsPension Righ…NEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC: $100,000 · Civil RightsNEW GEORGIA …BVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC: $100,000 · Civil RightsBVM CAPACITY…PRIDE AT WORK AFL-CIO: $60,000 · Civil RightsPRIDE AT WOR…The Sanders Institute: $50,000 · Civil RightsThe Sanders …OUR REVOLUTION-TEXAS: $40,000 · Civil RightsOUR REVOLUTI…+1 more: $15,000 · Civil RightsDEVELOPMENT NOW FOR CHICAGO: $250,000 · Community ImprovementDEVELOPME…INDIAN COUNTRY GRASSROOTS SUPPORT: $50,000 · Community ImprovementINDIAN CO…UNITE HERE EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FUND: $50,000 · Community ImprovementUNITE HER…+1 more: $10,000 · Community ImprovementHEALTHCARE-NOW INC: $121,000 · HealthLABOR CAMPAIGN FOR SINGLE PAYER HEALTHCARE: $62,500 · HealthLOS ANGELES ALLIANCE FOR A NEW ECONOMY: $40,000 · HealthTAKEACTION MINNESOTA: $100,000 · Public BenefitCONGRESSIONAL PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS CENTER: $40,000 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $10,000 · Public BenefitNATIONAL ACTION NETWORK INC: $10,000 · Public BenefitMIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $25,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $25,000 · InternationalAlliance for Global Justice Corp: $15,000 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS: $10,000 · InternationalUE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION FUND: $10,000 · International
Other$1,575,005Education$1,336,971Civil Rights$475,300Community Improvement$360,000Health$223,500Public Benefit$160,000International$85,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetRUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $791,638 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $522,333 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHEALTHCARE-NOW INC: $121,000 over 6y, 19% of budgetPension Rights Center: $110,300 over 8y, 2.9% of budgetNEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTAKEACTION MINNESOTA: $100,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetBVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetAMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS: $96,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetLABOR CAMPAIGN FOR SINGLE PAYER HEALTHCARE: $62,500 over 6y, 12% of budgetUNITED MINE WORKERS OF AMERICA: $60,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetPRIDE AT WORK AFL-CIO: $60,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS NURSES ASSOCIATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMARCH FOR OUR LIVES ACTION FUND: $50,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetUNITE HERE EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FUND: $50,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetLOS ANGELES ALLIANCE FOR A NEW ECONOMY: $40,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetUS LABOR AGAINST RACISM AND WAR INC: $28,125 over 3y, 16% of budgetINTERNATIONAL UNION - UAW: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED WAY OF KENTUCKY INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUNION VETERANS COUNCIL: $25,000 over 2y, 4.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOALITION OF BLACK TRADE UNIONISTS: $25,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetAMERICAN MUSEUM TORT LAW INC: $25,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetUNION COMMUNITY FUND: $20,000 over 1y, 44% of budgetTHE ACTORS' FUND OF AMERICA: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLOUISIANA AFL - CIO: $20,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetDISTRICT COUNCIL 47 HEALTH AND WELFARE FUND: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJOBS WITH JUSTICE EDUCATION FUND: $17,500 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetAlliance for Global Justice Corp: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAFL-CIO TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE: $15,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY ACTION FUND INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetINTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION FUND: $10,000 over 1y, 8.5% of budgetCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK GREATER NEW ORLEANS AND ACADIANA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH LABOR COMMITTEE: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetNATIONAL ACTION NETWORK INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetIOWA CITIZENS FOR COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetJEWS UNITED FOR JUSTICE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetIndependent Media Institute: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

American Federation o…Communications Worker…American Federation o…Int Union United Auto…International Brother…International Union o…United Steel Paper an…International Brother…Unite HereUnited Food and Comme…National Education As…National Association …
American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial OrganizationsDC26× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations · Communications Workers of America Afl-Cio Clc · American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees · Int Union United Auto National Community Action Program · International Brotherhood of Teamsters · International Union of Painters and Allied Trades · United Steel Paper and Forestry Rubber Manufacturing Energy Allied · International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers · Unite Here · United Food and Commercial Workers International Union · National Education Association of the United States · National Association of Letter Carriers

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization National Nurses United funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from National Nurses United. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Massachusetts Nurses Association: 0% of income from government
  • Rutgers University Foundation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 56 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on National Nurses United’s filings →

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 endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home