· Public charity
United Steelworkers
The mission statement of the organization includes, but is not limited to on behalf of its members collective bargaining, grievance procedures, arbitration, strike benefits, education, organize, and to improve the working conditions of its members.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 3 grants below total $45,750 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $80,976 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $35,226 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 |
|---|---|
| LABOR COMMUNITY SERVICES | $20,750 |
| SOUTH BAY CENTER FOR COUNCILING | $15,000 |
| LACLAA LA CHAPTER | $10,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 75% 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 +223% since the first grant, against +11% for the ones you funded once.
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
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k 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
- LLLCLAA LA CHAPTER3× · 2021–2025 · $35k
- KIKOREAN IMMIGRANT WORKERS ADVOCATES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA3× · 2020–2022 · $26k · revenue +223%
- SBSOUTH BAY CENTER FOR COUNCILING2× · 2023–2025 · $25k
Funded once
- CLCalifornia Labor Federation AFL-CIOone grant, 2020 · $35k · revenue +8%
- TMTHE MIGUEL CONTRERAS FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +19%
- USUNITED STEELWORKERSone grant, 2021 · $20k · revenue -92%
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 mission statement of the organizatin includes, but is not limited to, on behalf of its members, collective bargaining, greivance procedures, arbitration, strike benefits, education, and to improve the working conditions of its members.
The mission statement of the Organization includes, but is not limited to on behalf of its Members Collective Barganing, Grievance procedures, Arbitration, Strike Benefits, Education, and to improve the working conditions of its Members.
The Mission Statement of the Organization Includes, but is not limited to, on Behalf of its Members Collective Bargaining, Grievance Procedures, Arbitration, Strike Benefits, Education, and to Improve the Working Conditions of its Members.
Union hall devoted to the betterment of members compensation and working conditions, to secure recognition of workers rights to engage in collective bargaining, and to promote the development and maintenance of on-the-job safety practices…
The local is a nonprofit organization established to represent its members in wage and fringe benefits matters in the construction industry. the local's primary areas of jurisdiction are oakland and livingston counties.
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…
The Labor Council offers an avenue for local unions to come together as one group.
To advance middle class and working class values by promoting social and economic justice. we join together over 263,000 union members to make our voice heard in the policy and political arenas. the ohio afl-cio represents 1,787 local…
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…
Promote and protect the interests of the members of the local
The council is a federation of approximately 85 affiliated unions. the organizaton engages in a wide range of activities. the activities are designed to improve the lives of working families, to bring economic justice to the workplace, and…
Labor union
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Los Angeles County Federation of Labor Afl-Cio and the most unlike its peers is United Steelworkers. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
8 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. 8 of the 12 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 California Labor Federation AFL-CIO ↗
- Who funds KOREAN IMMIGRANT WORKERS ADVOCATES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds THE MIGUEL CONTRERAS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES COUNTY FEDERATION OF LABOR AFL-CIO ↗
- Who funds UNITED STEELWORKERS ↗
- Who funds United Steelworkers Local 12-00005 ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR AND CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS ↗
- Who funds Jobs with Justice San Francisco ↗
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: The James Irvine 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 United Steelworkers 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.