· Public charity
Uaw Region 1-D Cap
Meetings, education, communication, community action and donations, non-partisan voter registration, administration of the organization, maintenance of its properties and assets, fraternal and social activities and related activities which further the common interest of the membership.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2022.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 3 grants below total $17,800 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $89,965 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $72,165 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OLD NEWSBOYS OF FLINT | $6,300 |
| FOOD BANK OF EASTERN MICHIGAN | $6,000 |
| UNITED WAY OF GENESEE COUNTY | $5,500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 18%. 82% of your 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.
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.
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 +34% since the first grant, against +29% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2022, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (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 FY2022, 35% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k 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
- UMUAW MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM3× · 2018–2024 · $356k · revenue +68%
- ONOLD NEWSBOYS OF FLINT INC5× · 2018–2024 · $18k · revenue +6%
- GCGENESEE COUNTY FREE MEDICAL CLINIC2× · 2018–2019 · $10k · revenue +34%
Funded once
- APA PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTEgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +380%
- TSTHE SALVATION ARMYone grant, 2018 · $5k
- SASAGINAW AFRICAN CULTURAL FESTIVAL INCone grant, 2018 · $5k
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.
To promote the common economic interests of all the commercial enterprises in the Genesee County, Michigan community. The Organization strives to enhance the business climate in the area and advocates for public policy that supports…
To be a catalyst for economic and community progress within the great lakes bay region.
Labor union representing food and commercial workers, primarily in southeast michigan.
To apply the principles of workforce development to grow michigan's economy while improving the lives of michigan workers.
Consistent with our trade union philosophy and tradition of advocating social and economic justice for all, we also see representing the unemployed, under-employed, and low income people as part of our mission. whether organized or yet to…
To promote conditions favorable to job creation and business success in michigan.
Business leaders for michigan is a nonprofit, nonpartisan statewide organization driven by ceos from the state's leading employers, all working toward a shared goal: making michigan a top 10 state for jobs, talent and a thriving economy.…
The organization was founded by a group of concerned citizens, working in cooperation with the detroit city council, to shape food policy and to work for a more localized, more just, and environmentally friendly food system. the…
Member driven organization working to achieve economy prosperity throughout the region. it's mission is to leverage every available resource within out network for the advancement of our members and the betterment of all who live in our…
To accelerate the transition to clean transportation in michigan. we advocate for the suite of alternative fuels including biofuels, hydrogen, propane, natural gas, and electric vehicles.
Improve the health of genesee county residents. improve the quality and cost effectiveness of the health care system in our community.
To organize local, underserved, or small limited resourse farmers in the Metro detroit, MI and region to inhance their production, marketing and distribution of produce in the metropolitian detroit area.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Saginaw Future Inc and the most unlike its peers is Downriver for Veterans. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 17 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
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 UAW MICHIGAN COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM ↗
- Who funds OLD NEWSBOYS OF FLINT INC ↗
- Who funds GENESEE COUNTY FREE MEDICAL CLINIC ↗
- Who funds CENTER PARK PRODUCTIONS ↗
- Who funds A PHILIP RANDOLPH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Food Bank of Eastern Michigan ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF GENESEE COUNTY ↗
- Who funds SAGINAW AFRICAN CULTURAL FESTIVAL INC ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS MICHIGAN INC ↗
- Who funds DOWNRIVER FOR VETERANS ↗
- Who funds SAGINAW FUTURE INC ↗
- Who funds GLEANERS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK OF SOUTHEASTERN MICHIGAN ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Stella & Frederick Loeb Charitable Trust · Community Foundation of Greater Flint · Charles Stewart Mott Foundation · Amazonsmile 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 Uaw Region 1-D Cap 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.
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 Uaw Region 1-D Cap?
Find your warmest path to Uaw Region 1-D Cap 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.