Skip to content

· Public charity

Social Justice and Solidarity Fund

The Funds mission is to provide sustained support to grassroots organizing projects and movements rooted in the multi-racial working class which rely on their members and constituency to build power in the community.

$742k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$189k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2024.

Employment$338kCrime & Legal$173kCivil Rights$25k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $65k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $677k
$60,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$2.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Labor Ed & Research Project$189,000
UAWD Mutual Aid Fund$186,860
Teamster Rank File Legal Def$106,000
EWR & File Ed Defense Fund$85,000
Essential Workers for Demo$60,000
Assoc for Union Democracy Inc$50,000
ACRE Institute$25,000
Fdn of the Causcus REF Worker$20,000
New York Taxi Worker Alliance$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 (FY23–25, $55k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, 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%New York Taxi Worker Alliance: $25k → 13%New York Taxi Worker Alliance: $20k → 13%New York Taxi Worker Alliance: $10k → 13%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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 5 repeat orgs$190k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$1.1M
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+3%
+126%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $180k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
EmploymentCivil RightsInternationalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • LE
    LABOR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH PROJECT
    4× · 2022–2025 · $405k · revenue +3%
  • TR
    TEAMSTER RANK AND FILE EDUCATION AND LEGAL DEFENSE FOUNDATION
    4× · 2022–2025 · $279k · revenue +94%
  • NY
    New York Taxi Workers Alliance
    3× · 2023–2025 · $55k · revenue +33%

Funded once

  • UR
    UE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +126%
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
Unite All Workers for Democracy

To secure and maintain a better union, an informed and empowered membership, and the democratic direct election of strong, well-qualified, and honest leaders to all of our union offices, UAWD works now and will continue to work to…

—
2
Railroad Workers Education & Legal Defense Foundation

Unity and solidarity among railroaders, and ensure democracy and transparency in our unions

Education
3
LaborLab

LaborLab is a nonprofit watchdog dedicated to safeguarding workers rights to organize, win strong contracts, and build lasting collective power. Through strategic research, educational resources, and corporate accountability, we empower…

Human Services
4
National Legal Advocacy Network Dba Glow

The National Legal Advocacy Network d/b/a Grassroots Law & Organizing for Workers is a legal non-profit organization dedicated to using legal strategies as a tool to build power for marginalized workers and create systemic change through…

Crime & Legal
5
American Federation of Labor & Congress of Industrial Orgs

Aid and assist affiliated organizations by extending the benefits of mutual assistance and collective bargaining; and to promote union organization through education and policy.

—
6
Laborers Eastern Region Political Education Fund

The laborers' eastern region political education fund (the organization") was established to promote the political education of laborers in the eastern region. the organization is funded by an apportionment of the dues and fees paid to the…

Employment
7
Jobs With Justice Education Fund

The organization serves as a coalition of labor organizations, community groups, faith-based organizations, and student groups dedicated to protecting the rights of working people. To this end, the corporation shall engage in organizing…

—
8
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…

—
9
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers 194 Local

Labor union - electrical workers

—
10
United Electrical Radio & Machine Workers of America

Organization and representation of workers

—
11
Drivers Union

Drivers Union is a nonprofit organization that advances justice and fairness for gig economy workers, most of whom are immigrants and refugees, through organizing, education, advocacy, and free legal support.

Public Benefit
12
Young Workers United

Educate/Advocate for historically marginalized groups.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Essential Workers for Democracy; the most unlike its peers is New York Taxi Workers 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

8 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. 8 of the 10 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TEAMSTER RANK AND FILE EDUCATION AND LEGAL DEFENSE FOUNDATION: $279,000 · OtherTEAMSTER RANK AND FILE EDUCATION AND LEGAL DEFENSE FOUNDA…UAWD MUTUAL AID FUND INC: $264,360 · OtherUAWD MUTUAL AID FUND INCEWR & File Ed Defense Fund: $85,000 · OtherEWR & File Ed Defense Fund+1 more: $20,000 · OtherLABOR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH PROJECT: $404,500 · EmploymentLABOR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH PROJECTASSOCIATION FOR UNION DEMOCRACY INC: $50,000 · EmploymentASSOCIATION FOR UNION DEMOCRACY INCESSENTIAL WORKERS FOR DEMOCRACY: $85,000 · Civil RightsESSENTIAL…Action Center on Race & the Economy Institute: $25,000 · Civil RightsAction Ce…New York Taxi Workers Alliance: $55,000 · Human ServicesUE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION FUND: $10,000 · International
Other$648,360Employment$454,500Civil Rights$110,000Human Services$55,000International$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLABOR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH PROJECT: $404,500 over 4y, 9.2% of budgetTEAMSTER RANK AND FILE EDUCATION AND LEGAL DEFENSE FOUNDATION: $279,000 over 4y, 6.1% of budgetUAWD MUTUAL AID FUND INC: $264,360 over 4y, 88% of budgetESSENTIAL WORKERS FOR DEMOCRACY: $85,000 over 2y, 3.7% of budgetNew York Taxi Workers Alliance: $55,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetASSOCIATION FOR UNION DEMOCRACY INC: $50,000 over 1y, 44% of budgetUE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION FUND: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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.

Amalgamated Charitable Foundation IncDC13.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Social Justice and Solidarity Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Social Justice and Solidarity Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–5%
    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 Social Justice and Solidarity Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Social Justice and Solidarity 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 10 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 Social Justice and Solidarity’s filings →

    More from the funding graph