Skip to content
Neca-Ibew National Labor-Management Cooperation Committee Trust Fund at a glance

· Public charity

Neca-Ibew National Labor-Management Cooperation Committee Trust Fund

To improve the relationship between employers and ibew (the union) to all levels, explore ways for labor and management to work together to become more competitive, to implement programs that increase employment opportunities for employers and employees.

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
37
Grants FY2025still arriving
22
States reached
$300k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Employment$3.6MCommunity Improvement$2.6MMembership Benefit$680kArts & Culture$288kRecreation & Sports$65kPublic Benefit$62kHuman Services$50kEnvironment$28kOther$0
02FY2025 · 37 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 37 grants below total $1,487,616, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,518,891 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $31,275 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 · $7k
  • $10k–50k33 grants · $686k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $195k
  • $250k+2 grants · $600k
$20,000
Median grant
22
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NECA INC$300,000
IBEW$300,000
UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE$195,000
NSUJL$35,000
IBEW LOCAL 14$30,000
SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LMCT$27,625
IDAHO CHAPTER-NECALOCAL UNION 449-IBEW LMCC$27,250
IBEW LOCAL 606$25,000
JULIUS EDUCATION$25,000
IBEW LOCAL 890$24,959
BUTLER & WARREN COUNTY LMCC LLC$20,000
IBEW NECA-ARIZONA LMCC TRUST$20,000
WEST MICHIGAN LMCC$20,000
CANTON LABOR MANAGEMENT COOPERATION COMMITTEE$20,000
ELECTRICAL LMCC OF DAYTON$20,000
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 (FY22–25, $85k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NSUJL: $35k → 15%NATIONAL SISTERHOOD UNITED FOR JOURNEYMEN LINEMEN (NSUJL): $25k → 15%NSUJL: $25k → 15%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
NH
ID
MN
IL
WI
MI
OR
NV
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
CT
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
VA
MD
AZ
NM
AR
TN
NC
DC
OK
LA
AL
GA
TX
FL
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.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.8M · 25 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +30% since the first grant, against +20% for those funded once.

25 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 19 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
67

Total granted

$6.8M
$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
+20%

Still filing today

100%
82%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $379k 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
EmploymentCommunity ImprovementEnvironmentHuman ServicesPhilanthropyScience & TechOther
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

  • IB
    INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.8M · revenue +25%
  • NE
    NATIONAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.6M · revenue +59%
  • US
    UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE
    2× · 2022–2025 · $260k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • RT
    RENO TYPE
    one grant, 2024 · $198k
  • EL
    ELECTRICAL LMCC OF DAYTON OHIO INC
    one grant, 2024 · $71k · revenue 0% · 29% of their budget
  • BM
    BMA MEDIA GROUP
    one grant, 2022 · $64k
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
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 77 & Subs

To provide the membership quality labor conditions.

—
2
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 349

Maintain labor relations and promote the interest of its members in their employment as electrical workers.

—
3
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Afl-Cio Local 1340

To provide the members of the local electrical union with services and benefits.

—
4
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No 46

To organize workers in the electrical industry, including public utilities and manufacturing, into local unions, promote reasonable methods of work, settle disputes between employers and employees by arbitration, assist members, reduce…

—
5
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 191

To organize workers in the electrical industry, settle disputes between employers and employees by arbitration, reduce hours, secure adequate pay for work, seek a higher standard of living for members, seek security for members, by legal…

—
6
International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 957

Labor union

—
7
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 1186

Provide improved wages, fringes benefits and working conditions for members through organizing and collective bargaining

—
8
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No 110

Labor union

—
9
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 340

The international brotherhood of electrical workers local 340 is the collective bargaining agent for persons employed by union shops in the related industry. as a member supported organization, the majority of income is generated by dues…

—
10
Electical Workers Indianapolis Motorcycle Group Inc
Human Services
11
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Ks State Assn

To coordinate the political and legislative effort of local unions

Employment
12
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union No 134

Labor union

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 194 Local; the most unlike its peers is Mansfield Area Labor Management Cooperative. 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

97 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 97 of the 111 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
18
Early backer (in before they grew)
96/97
Grantees still filing
60/97
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS: $2,799,832 · OtherINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERSNATIONAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION INC: $2,625,000 · OtherNATIONAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION INC+89 more: $2,710,186 · Other+89 moreUNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $260,000 · EnvironmentOCEANTIC NETWORK INC: $20,000 · EnvironmentIBEW LOCAL 275 WEST MICHIGAN LABOR: $20,000 · EmploymentELECTRICAL LMCC OF DAYTON: $20,000 · EmploymentIBEW LOCAL 159: $20,000 · EmploymentIBEW NECA-ARIZONA LMCC TRUST: $20,000 · EmploymentMISSOURI VALLEY LINE CONSTRUCTORS JOINT APPRENTICESHIP AND TRAINING TRUST FUND: $20,000 · EmploymentPADUCAH ELECTRICAL LMCC TRUST FUND: $20,000 · EmploymentIBEW LOCAL NO 743 LLMCC: $20,000 · EmploymentIBEW LOCAL 112: $20,000 · EmploymentCENTER FOR MILITARY RECRUITMENT ASSESSMENT AND VETERANS EMPLOYMENT: $17,032 · EmploymentIBEW LOCAL 265NEBRASKA NECA LABOR MANAGEMENT COOPERATION COMM: $13,895 · EmploymentInternational Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 0681 Local: $8,073 · Employment+1 more: $6,250 · EmploymentCanton Electrical Labor Management: $60,000 · Community ImprovementQUALITY CONNECTION OF THE GREATER WABASH VALLEY INC: $20,000 · Community ImprovementMANSFIELD AREA LABOR MANAGEMENT COOPERATIVE: $20,000 · Community ImprovementNATIONAL SISTERHOOD UNITED FOR JOURNEYMEN LINEMEN: $85,000 · Human ServicesIBEW - NECA EPIC TRUST FUND: $20,000 · PhilanthropyELECTRI INTERNATIONAL - THE FOUNDATION FOR ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION INC: $15,000 · Science & Tech
Other$8,135,018Environment$280,000Employment$205,250Community Improvement$100,000Human Services$85,000Philanthropy$20,000Science & Tech$15,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS: $2,799,832 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetNATIONAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATION INC: $2,625,000 over 9y, 1.2% of budgetUNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $260,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetNATIONAL SISTERHOOD UNITED FOR JOURNEYMEN LINEMEN: $85,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTR WORKERS LOCAL NO 474: $80,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetELECTRICAL LMCC OF DAYTON OHIO INC: $70,700 over 1y, 29% of budgetInternational Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 606: $66,617 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetLOCAL NO 494 INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD: $65,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetIBEW LOCAL NO 48: $64,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCanton Electrical Labor Management: $60,000 over 2y, 28% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LU 553: $60,000 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetInternational Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local Union 640: $60,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetLOCAL UNION 159 OF THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS: $60,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetNATIONAL ELECTRICAL CONTRACTORS OF ASSN INC: $60,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetInternational Brotherhood Elec Wkrs - LU 665: $59,960 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL #280: $50,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS - 0014 LOCAL: $50,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL 659: $48,784 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL UNION NO 153: $48,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetIBEW LOCAL 291: $45,010 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LU 379: $40,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL UNION 60: $40,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL 816: $40,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetIBEW LOCAL 300: $38,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetKALAMAZOO ELECTRICAL LABOR-MANAGEMENT CO: $36,000 over 2y, 24% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF 1316 LOCAL UNION: $34,700 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS - LOCAL UNION 490 - GENERAL FUND: $34,280 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetLABOR MANAGEMENT COOPERATION COMM: $33,018 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL UNION 22: $31,106 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT LABOR- MANAGEMENT POLICY COMMITTEE: $30,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHER OF 0032 LOCAL: $30,000 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL UNION 136: $28,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetSAN JOAQUIN VALLEY ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LMCT: $27,625 over 1y, 9.5% of budgetIDAHO CHAPTER-NECALOCAL UNION 449-IBEW LMCC: $27,250 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL UNION 12: $25,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetNECA-IBEW 701 LABOR MANAGEMENT COOPERATION COMMITTEE: $20,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetIBEW LOCAL 275 WEST MICHIGAN LABOR: $20,000 over 1y, 29% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL 347: $20,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetIBEW LOCAL 159: $20,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetINTERNATL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL UNION 1205: $20,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL UNION NO 481: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNational Electrical Contractors Assn Central New Mexico: $20,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetOCEANTIC NETWORK INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL UNION 68: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL LOCAL 760: $20,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budget659 LABOR MANAGEMENT COOPERATION: $20,000 over 1y, 65% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS: $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF: $20,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Neca-Ibew National Labor-Management Cooperation Committee Trust Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Neca-Ibew National Labor-Management Cooperation Committee Trust Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 100%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Oceantic Network Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
10get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Neca-Ibew National Labor-Management Cooperation Committee Trust Fund?

Find your warmest path to Neca-Ibew National Labor-Management Cooperation Committee Trust Fund 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.

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 111 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 Neca-Ibew National Labor-Management Cooperation Committee’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