· Private foundation
Teamsters Local 986 Charity Fund Inc
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k68 grants · $154k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $123k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $233k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Teamsters Scholarship Fund | $75,000 |
| Teamsters JC 42 Charity | $55,000 |
| Colette's Children's Home | $52,500 |
| Los Angeles Dodgers Foundation | $50,000 |
| Teamsters Local 986 Scholarship Fun | $30,000 |
| Big Brothers Big Sisters of Norther | $26,000 |
| Worker Solidarity Defense Foundatio | $20,000 |
| United Labor Agency of Nevada ULAN | $15,500 |
| Teamsters Local 25 Autism Fund | $11,000 |
| Teamsters Local 1932 Charity | $10,000 |
| Villa De Vida | $10,000 |
| California Teamsters Hispanic Caucu | $6,910 |
| Teamsters Local 986 | $6,534 |
| Child Haven | $5,000 |
| Teamsters Local 299 Community Svc | $5,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $177k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 6% of Teamsters Local 986 Charity Fund Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 69% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 63% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +25% since the first grant, against +20% for the ones you funded once.
115 repeat relationships — 55 still active in FY2024, 60 since wound down; 24 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $67k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- TLTHE LOS ANGELES DODGERS FOUNDATION5× · 2017–2024 · $133k · revenue +149%
- LALOS ANGELES ALLIANCE FOR A NEW ECONOMY7× · 2017–2024 · $76k · revenue +19%
- LCLABOR COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM OF LOS ANGELES5× · 2017–2023 · $67k · revenue +314%
Funded once
- TDTEAMSTER DISASTER RELIEF FUNDone grant, 2017 · $68k · revenue -65%
- JRJAMES R HOFFA MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIP FUND INCone grant, 2022 · $49k · revenue -68%
- RFROOSTERS FOUNDATION OF ORANGE CNTYone grant, 2019 · $47k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
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.
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…
To promote better working conditions for members.
Teamsters local 1205 timothy lynch memorial scholarship fund exists for the purpose of making college education more easily accessible to the children and dependents of international brotherhood of teamsters local 1205 by providing…
To unite members into one organization for the purpose of improving economic advantage through collective bargaining and to promote education and social awareness of its membership.
Labor representative of the players in the usl championship and usl league one.
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.
To provide union representation for 4,687 members of teamsters local union no. 509.
The council coordinated the efforts of affiliated local unions and assisted their organizations work, bettering the working conditions of their members.
To provide scholarships for families of local union members.
To organize all workers for the economic, moral, and social advancement of their condition and status.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Nevada and the most unlike its peers is We T I P Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 25 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
98 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. 98 of the 258 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds MEMBERS HEALTH FAIR INC ↗
- Who funds COLETTE'S CHILDREN'S HOME INC ↗
- Who funds THE LOS ANGELES DODGERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES ALLIANCE FOR A NEW ECONOMY ↗
- Who funds TEAMSTER DISASTER RELIEF FUND ↗
- Who funds LABOR COMMUNITY SERVICES PROGRAM OF LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA TEAMSTERS HISPANIC CAUCUS INC ↗
- Who funds TEAMSTERS LOCAL 25 AUTISM FUND INC ↗
- Who funds JAMES R HOFFA MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIP FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE SHADE TREE INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT 150 ↗
- Who funds CANDLELIGHTERS FOR CHILDHOOD CANCER ↗
- Who funds THE MUSIC FUND OF LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds FUTURE SMILES ↗
- Who funds UNITED LABOR AGENCY OF NEVADA INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S MIRACLE NETWORK ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds TEAMSTERS 848 ALL CHARITIES FUND INC ↗
- Who funds HOPE FOR PRISONERS INC ↗
- Who funds VILLA DE VIDA INC ↗
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 loosely connected circle, clustered around a few shared anchors.
Open a dossier: International Brotherhood of Teamsters · International Brotherhood of 063 TCWH · Engelstad Family Foundation · Mgm Resorts Foundation · Canarelli Family Foundation · International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 2010 · Teamsters Local 1932 · The Boyd Family Foundation · NV Energy Charitable Foundation · Sempra Foundation · International Brotherhood of 396 TCWH · The Mel & Ruth Wolzinger 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 Teamsters Local 986 Charity Fund Inc 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.
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc — 0% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Teamsters Local 986 Charity Fund Inc?
Find your warmest path to Teamsters Local 986 Charity Fund Inc 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.