Skip to content
United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local No 5 at a glance

· Public charity

United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local No 5

The purpose of the union is to organize workers, within its jurisdiction into a single organization for the purpose of collective bargaining of wages, hours, benefits and working conditions; to resolve grievances and advance and safeguard the full employment, economic security and social welfare of its members.

$113k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$24k
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.

Human Services$430kHealth$228kEmployment$176kPhilanthropy$12kPublic Benefit$6k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $30,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $113,409 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $83,409 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $24k
$24,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$25M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WORKING PARTNERSHIPS USA$24,000
LOVEALL FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN$6,000
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 (FY17–23, $430k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%LABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERS: $90k → 10%LABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERS: $60k → 10%LABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERS: $60k → 10%LABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERS: $60k → 10%LABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERS: $60k → 10%LABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERS: $60k → 10%LABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERS: $40k → 10%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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$670k · 3 repeat orgs$182k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +158% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
5

Total granted

$670k
$182k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+158%
+7%

Still filing today

100%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHealthPhilanthropyPublic BenefitOther
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

  • LF
    LABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERS
    7× · 2017–2023 · $430k · revenue -35% · 64% of their budget
  • Working Partnerships USA
    8× · 2017–2024 · $228k · revenue +183%
  • TL
    THE LOVEALL FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN
    2× · 2023–2024 · $12k · revenue +158%

Funded once

  • CT
    Coalition to Protect Riders and Drivers sponsored by the CA Labor Federation AFL-CIO
    one grant, 2020 · $125k
  • AF
    American Federation of Labor & North Bay Labor Councilgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $21k · revenue +119%
  • UF
    UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS UNION LOCAL 8 - GOLDEN STATE
    one grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue +11%
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
United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local 3000

Labor union

—
2
United Food & Commercial Workers

To enable working men and women to have representation in negotiating wages, benefits a good working conditons with their employer.

—
3
California Labor Federation Afl-Cio

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.

—
4
United Food & Commercial Workers Local1564

To organize workers for their economic and general well being.

—
5
United Food and Commercial Workers 1149

To promote fair working rules and wages for workers.

—
6
Sacramento Central Labor Council

To benefit local trade unions and their members through education and promotion of union labor to the public.

—
7
United Food & Commercial Wrks 1996

To promote rights of workers to organize and negotiate for better working conditions, wages and benefits.

—
8
Workforce Defense League

To educate the general public with respect to the right to fair and lawful wages, benefits and terms of conditions of employment for all workers, and engaging in litigation to advocate for and defend the lawful rights of all workers to be…

Employment
9
North Valley Labor Federation

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.

—
10
Northern Ca Construction Workers Unity Action Corporation

To promote the use of union building trades in construction projects in the bay area.

Employment
11
United Food and Commercial Workers Local 1208

To improve the lives of working families and to bring economic justice to the workplace.

—
12
Ufcw District Union Local Two

To improve working conditions of its members and provide benefits of collective bargaining,

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 8 - Golden State; the most unlike its peers is The Loveall Foundation for Children. 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.

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

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERS: $430,000 · Human ServicesLABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERSWorking Partnerships USA: $227,786 · HealthWorking Partnerships USACoalition to Protect Riders and Drivers sponsored by the CA Labor Federation AFL-CIO: $125,000 · OtherCoalition to Protect Ri…American Federation of Labor & North Bay Labor Council: $20,500 · OtherAmerican Federation of …UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS UNION LOCAL 8 - GOLDEN STATE: $20,000 · OtherUNITED FOOD AND COMMERC…United Food & Commercial Workers: $10,000 · OtherUnited Food & Commercia…THE LOVEALL FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN: $12,000 · PhilanthropyWESTERN STATES ISSUE EDUCATION FUND INC: $6,000 · Public Benefit
Human Services$430,000Health$227,786Other$175,500Philanthropy$12,000Public Benefit$6,000

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 budgetLABOR FOUNDATION FOR UNION WORKERS: $430,000 over 7y, 64% of budgetWorking Partnerships USA: $227,786 over 8y, 1.4% of budgetCoalition to Protect Riders and Drivers sponsored by the CA Labor Federation AFL-CIO: $125,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetUNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS UNION LOCAL 8 - GOLDEN STATE: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE LOVEALL FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN: $12,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetUnited Food & Commercial Workers: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWESTERN STATES ISSUE EDUCATION FUND INC: $6,000 over 1y, 4.3% 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.

United Food and Comme…
United Food and Commercial Workers International UnionDC15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Food and Commercial Workers International Union

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 United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local No 5 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local No 5. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%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, FY20–24
    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 8 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.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local No 5’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