Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Public charity

Seiu Local 1021

Our mission is to ensure that all workers and their families have a voice in our union, as well as our workplace, government, and communities.

$232k
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.

Civil Rights$243kEmployment$190kPublic Safety & Disaster$155kCommunity Improvement$70kPublic Benefit$41kEducation$35kCrime & Legal$30kHuman Services$21kOther$0
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 6 grants below total $125,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $232,191 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $107,191 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–50k5 grants · $75k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$20,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$69M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC$50,000
SAN FRANCISCO LABOR COUNCIL AFL-CIO$25,000
JOBS WITH JUSTICE SAN FRANCISCO$20,000
NORTH BAY JOBS WITH JUSTICELIVING WAGE COALITION$10,000
CALIFORNIA ALLIANCE FOR RETIRED AMERICANS$10,000
EAST BAY ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY$10,000
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 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 59% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%RICHMOND PROGRESSIVE ALLIANCE: $6k → 9%NORTH BAY LABOR COUNCIL: $10k → 9%SEIU UNITED HEALTHCARE WORKERS WEST AND JOINT EMPLOYER EDUCATION FUND: $10k → 10%JOBS WITH JUSTICE SAN FRANCISCO: $20k → 10%SEIU CALIFORNIA STATE COUNCIL (PER CAPITA): $100k → 12%TIDES ADVOCACY: $10k → 14%WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $50k → 20%USLAW - US LABOR AGAINST THE WAR: $6k → 14%SEIU LOCAL 73: $25k → 14%RICHMOND PROGRESSIVE ALLIANCE: $5k → 9%ASIAN HEALTH SERVICES: $5k → 10%JOBS WITH JUSTICE SAN FRANCISCO: $20k → 10%SEIU CALIFORNIA STATE COUNCIL: $55k → 12%CAPITAL & MAIN: $30k → 14%WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC: $50k → 20%USLAW - US LABOR AGAINST THE WAR: $6k → 14%CENTRAL LABOR COUNCIL OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: $10k → 9%EAST BAY ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $30k → 10%JOBS WITH JUSTICE SAN FRANCISCO: $20k → 10%WORKING FAMILIES: $50k → 20%EBASE: $10k → 10%JOBS WITH JUSTICE SAN FRANCISCO: $20k → 10%WORKING FAMILIES: $50k → 20%EAST BAY ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $10k → 10%JOBS WITH JUSTICE SAN FRANCISCO: $20k → 10%ST MARY'S COLLEGE OF CALIFORNIA: $10k → 10%CHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION: $10k → 10%EAST BAY ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAINABLE ECONOMY: $10k → 10%CHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION: $10k → 10%MOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER: $5k → 10%SAN FRANCISCO LABOR COUNCIL AFL-CIO: $25k → 10%EBASE: $5k → 10%ACCE ACTION: $25k → 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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$604k · 9 repeat orgs$195k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +42% since the first grant, against +42% for the ones you funded once.

9 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
12

Total granted

$604k
$170k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
+42%

Still filing today

89%
92%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationCivil RightsHealthEmploymentPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • WF
    WORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $200k · revenue +42%
  • CS
    CALIFORNIA STATE COUNCIL OF SERVICE EMPLOYEES
    2× · 2017–2018 · $155k · revenue +72%
  • JW
    Jobs with Justice San Francisco
    4× · 2021–2024 · $80k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • CAPITAL & MAINgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $30k · revenue +73%
  • AI
    ACCE Institutegraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +81%
  • SE
    SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL NO 73
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue +13%

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
San Diego and Imperial Counties Labor Council Afl-Cio

The Labor Council offers an avenue for local unions to come together as one group.

—
2
North Valley Labor Federation

The North Valley Labor Federations mission is to grow and strengthen the labor movement and build a strong political voice for working families in the Northern San Joaquin Valley.

—
3
The Laborers Pacific Southwest Regional Organizing Coalition

to organize workers in the laborers international union of north America, afl-cio pacific southwest region through a coordinated program to maintain and improve employment opportunities for affiliated local union members and to recruit new…

Employment
4
Alameda County Prosecutors Association

Alameda county prosecutors association is a labor association that represents the employment interests of deputy district attorneys (including senior deputy district attorneys, also known as assistant district attorneys) employed in the…

Employment
5
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…

—
6
Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy

CAUSE's mission is to build grassroots power to realize social, economic and environmental justice for the people of the Central Coast Region through policy research, leadership development, organizing and advocacy.

Community Improvement
7
California Labor Federation Afl-Cio

The primary purposes of the organization are the study of economic and social conditions; the pursuit of policies aimed at effecting a more equal distribution of wealth; and the promotion of full employment.

—
8
American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

The american civil liberties union of northern california (aclu nc union) defends and advances the principles of freedom, equality and justice contained in the united states constitution. aclu nc union, a california mutual benefit…

—
9
California Alliance for Jobs

To actively participate in the enhancement and development of unionized construction work in the Northern California area, and to promote public awareness of the importance of construction as an economic factor in the continued growth and…

—
10
Washington State Labor Council Afl-Cio

To protect and strengthen the rights and conditions of working people and their families.

—
11
Unite Here Local 49

Labor organization providing collective bargaining representation to its membership.

—
12
California Forward

Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…

Public Benefit

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Capital & Main and the most unlike its peers is Richmond Progressive Alliance. 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

21 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. 21 of the 22 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
15/21
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CALIFORNIA STATE COUNCIL OF SERVICE EMPLOYEES — $155,000 · OtherCALIFORNIA STATE COUNCIL OF SERVICE EMPLOYEE…San Francisco Labor Council — $25,000 · OtherSan Francisco Labor CouncilSERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL NO 73 — $25,000 · OtherSERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL …JOBS WITH JUSTICE SAN FRANCISCO — $20,000 · OtherJOBS WITH JUSTICE SAN FRANCISCOUS LABOR AGAINST RACISM AND WAR INC — $12,500 · OtherRICHMOND PROGRESSIVE ALLIANCE — $11,000 · OtherCALIFORNIA ALLIANCE FOR RETIRED AMERICANS — $20,500 · OtherCALIFORNIA ALLIANCE FOR RETIRED AMERICANS+5 more — $45,000 · Other+5 moreWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC — $200,000 · Civil RightsWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INCNorth Bay Jobs With Justice — $40,000 · Civil RightsNorth Bay Jobs With JusticeJobs with Justice San Francisco — $80,000 · EmploymentJobs with J…East Bay Alliance For A Sustainable Economy — $65,000 · Public BenefitEast Bay …ACCE Institute — $25,000 · EducationSEIU UNITED HEALTHCARE WORKERS WEST AND JOINT EMPLOYER EDUCATION FUND — $10,000 · EducationSAINT MARY'S COLLEGE OF CALIFORNIA — $10,000 · EducationCAPITAL & MAIN — $30,000 · Arts & CultureCHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION — $20,000 · HealthASIAN HEALTH SERVICES — $5,000 · Health
Other$314,000Civil Rights$240,000Employment$80,000Public Benefit$65,000Education$45,000Arts & Culture$30,000Health$25,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetWORKING FAMILIES ORGANIZATION INC — $200,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetJobs with Justice San Francisco — $80,000 over 4y, 2.4% of budgetEast Bay Alliance For A Sustainable Economy — $65,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetNorth Bay Jobs With Justice — $40,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetCAPITAL & MAIN — $30,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetACCE Institute — $25,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetSan Francisco Labor Council — $25,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetSERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION LOCAL NO 73 — $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCALIFORNIA ALLIANCE FOR RETIRED AMERICANS — $20,500 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetCHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION — $20,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetUS LABOR AGAINST RACISM AND WAR INC — $12,500 over 2y, 11% of budgetTIDES ADVOCACY — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCONTRA COSTA LABOR COUNCIL AFL-CIO — $10,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetSEIU UNITED HEALTHCARE WORKERS WEST AND JOINT EMPLOYER EDUCATION FUND — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAINT MARY'S COLLEGE OF CALIFORNIA — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetASIAN HEALTH SERVICES — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Seiu Local 2015California Nurses Ass…United Way of the Bay…The James Irvine Foun…Amalgamated Charitabl…The San Francisco Fou…
Seiu Local 2015CA19.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seiu Local 2015 · California Nurses Association · United Way of the Bay Area · The James Irvine Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The San Francisco Foundation

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 Seiu Local 1021 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%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–15%
    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 22 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