Skip to content
Teamsters Joint Council No 25 at a glance

· Public charity

Teamsters Joint Council No 25

To organize all workers for the advancement of their condition and status

$86k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Employment$172kPublic Benefit$50kCivil Rights$40kCommunity Improvement$33kHuman Services$19kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $32,953, the rows itemized in this filing. The $85,562 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $52,609 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 $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
$7,278
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR$20,025
TEAMSTERS JOINT COUNCIL WOMENS COMMITTEE$7,278
CHICAGO TEAMSTERS HISPANIC CAUCUS$5,650
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 85% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO 754: $10k → 7%TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO 330: $25k → 8%IL AFL-CIO EDUCATION AND REGISTRATION PROGRAM: $75k → 11%TEAMSTERS JOINT COUNCIL WOMENS COMMITTEE: $7k → 14%WARRIOR GAMES: $7k → 8%CHICAGO TEAMSTERS HISPANIC CAUCUS: $6k → 7%DEVELOPMENT NOW FOR CHICAGO: $33k → 14%ILLINOIS DELIVERS: $50k → 14%ARISE CHICAGO: $5k → 14%CHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR: $20k → 14%CHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR: $20k → 14%STATE OF ILL OBO GOLD STAR FAMILIES DECORATIONS AND TREE LIGHTING: $19k → 14%CHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR: $12k → 14%CHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR: $10k → 14%NORTHWEST SIDE IRISH: $8k → 14%TEAMSTERS JOINT COUNCIL 25 WOMENS COMMITTEE: $10k → 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.

28%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$91k · 4 repeat orgs$237k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
9

Total granted

$91k
$231k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-11%
+372%

Still filing today

75%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’24’25
EmploymentCommunity 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

  • CF
    CHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL UNION COUNCIL
    4× · 2022–2025 · $40k · revenue -11%
  • CF
    CHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR
    5× · 2017–2021 · $22k
  • TJ
    TEAMSTERS JOINT COUNCIL 25 WOMENS COMMIT
    3× · 2017–2025 · $17k · revenue -84%

Funded once

  • AF
    AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS
    one grant, 2024 · $75k · revenue -5%
  • ID
    ILLINOIS DELIVERS
    one grant, 2024 · $50k
  • DN
    DEVELOPMENT NOW FOR CHICAGO
    one grant, 2024 · $33k · revenue 0%
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
West Central Building and Construction Trades Council

Betterment of the wage earners working condition

Community Improvement
2
International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local Union 137

Labor organization for various industries; ensuring fair wages and proper benefits for its members.

—
3
Iron Workers District Council of Chicago and Vicinity

Organize workers for advancement

—
4
Fca of Illinois

A union painting, glazing, and drywall taping contractors association dedicated to improving the industry through negotiating and implementing a collective bargaining agreement, promoting safety, education, and training to its members,…

Community Improvement
5
Laborers' Int'l Union of North America District Council of Chicago

To promote unity of action in dealing with employers and to coordinate and consolidate the activities of its various affiliated local unions so they can work in a harmonious and united way.

—
6
Latino Union of Chicago

Latino Union works to defend the rights and dignity of contingent workers, including the right to immigrate, work, live free of oppression and violence, and provide for oneself and one's family.

Human Services
7
Indiana State Afl-Cio

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

—
8
American Federation of Labor & Congress of Industrial Orgs

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

—
9
Downstate Illinios Laborers District Cou

To organize workers, negotiate wages and benefit contracts for construction craft laborers in the local construction industry, secure pratical work hours, improve working conditions, and secure othe economical benefits through…

—
10
Teamsters Chauffeurs Warehousemen & Helpers- Local No 773

To organize workers and to secure improved wages, benefits and working conditions.

—
11
True Chicago
Arts & Culture
12
Illinois Pipe Trades Association

To promote, protect, and serve the member unions by establishing and maintaining minimum wage standards, protecting members from unjust competition, and overseeing labor agreements within the state of illinois.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations; the most unlike its peers is Illinois Executive Mansion Association. 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

10 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. 10 of the 14 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
3/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS: $75,000 · OtherAMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONSILLINOIS DELIVERS: $50,000 · OtherILLINOIS DELIVERSCHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL UNION COUNCIL: $40,050 · OtherCHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL UNION COUNCILTEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO 330: $25,000 · OtherTEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO 330CHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR: $21,925 · OtherCHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABORSTATE OF ILL OBO GOLD STAR FAMILIES DECORATIONS AND TREE LIGHTING: $19,366 · OtherSTATE OF ILL OBO GOLD STAR FAMILIES DECORATIONS AND TREE LIGHTINGTEAMSTERS NATIONAL BLACK CAUCUS: $11,950 · OtherTEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO 754: $10,000 · Other+3 more: $20,143 · Other+3 moreDEVELOPMENT NOW FOR CHICAGO: $32,500 · Community ImprovementDEVELOPMENT…TEAMSTERS JOINT COUNCIL 25 WOMENS COMMIT: $17,278 · EmploymentARISE CHICAGO: $5,000 · Employment
Other$273,434Community Improvement$32,500Employment$22,278

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 budgetAMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS: $75,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetCHICAGO FEDERATION OF LABOR AND INDUSTRIAL UNION COUNCIL: $40,050 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetDEVELOPMENT NOW FOR CHICAGO: $32,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTEAMSTERS NATIONAL BLACK CAUCUS: $11,950 over 4y, 1.6% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Int'L Brotherhood of …
Int'L Brotherhood of Teamsters Local Union No 727IL13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Int'L Brotherhood of Teamsters Local Union No 727

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 Teamsters Joint Council No 25 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Teamsters Joint Council No 25. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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.

    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 14 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 Teamsters Joint Council No 25’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