Skip to content
Service Employees International Union Local 722 at a glance

· Public charity

Service Employees International Union Local 722

To improve working conditions for represented employees.

$64k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$8k
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 2024.

Civil Rights$38kEmployment$33kPublic Benefit$16kCommunity Improvement$6k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $8,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $63,713 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $55,713 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.
$8,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
METRO WASHINGTON COUNCIL AFL-CIO$8,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%AFRAM CAUCUS OF SEIU: $25k → 16%CHILDRENS DEFENSE FUND: $15k → 14%METRO WASHINGTON COUNCIL AFL-CIO: $8k → 14%COMMUNITY SERVICE AGENCY OF METROPO: $8k → 14%METRO WASHINGTON COUNCIL AFL-CIO: $6k → 14%A PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE: $5k → 14%LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE US: $8k → 14%A PHILLIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE: $5k → 14%LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS: $8k → 14%COALITION OF LABOR UNION WOMEN: $5k → 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.
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.

43%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$40k · 3 repeat orgs$53k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +39% since the first grant, against -29% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
3

Total granted

$40k
$45k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
-29%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’23’24
InternationalCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • LO
    LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES
    2× · 2018–2019 · $16k · revenue +39%
  • CS
    COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY OF THE METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON COUNCIL AFL-CIO
    2× · 2017–2018 · $14k · revenue -74%
  • AP
    A PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE
    2× · 2019–2023 · $10k · revenue +345%

Funded once

  • SE
    SEIU EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -39%
  • CHILDREN'S DEFENSE FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $15k · revenue +39%
  • CO
    COALITION OF LABOR UNION WOMEN
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue -29%
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
04the grantee network

7 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.

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

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
3/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES: $15,741 · OtherLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATESA PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE: $10,000 · OtherA PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTEMETROPOLITAN WASHINGTON COUNCIL AFL-CIO: $8,000 · OtherMETROPOLITAN WASHINGTON COUNCIL AFL-CIOCOALITION OF LABOR UNION WOMEN: $5,000 · OtherCOALITION OF LABOR UNION WOMENSEIU EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FUND: $25,000 · InternationalSEIU EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FUN…CHILDREN'S DEFENSE FUND: $15,000 · Civil RightsCHILDREN'S DEFENSE…COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY OF THE METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON COUNCIL AFL-CIO: $13,975 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY SERVICE…
Other$38,741International$25,000Civil Rights$15,000Community Improvement$13,975

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSEIU EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE UNITED STATES: $15,741 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY OF THE METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON COUNCIL AFL-CIO: $13,975 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetA PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE: $10,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetMETROPOLITAN WASHINGTON COUNCIL AFL-CIO: $8,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCOALITION OF LABOR UNION WOMEN: $5,000 over 1y, 1.2% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Service Employees International Union Local 722 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Service Employees International Union Local 722. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 6%
  • Seiu Education and Support Fund: 6% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
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.

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 7 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $27k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Service Employees International Union Local 722’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