Skip to content
United Union of Roofers Waterproofers and Allied Workers at a glance

· Public charity

United Union of Roofers Waterproofers and Allied Workers

International labor union

$145k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$53k
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 2025.

Recreation & Sports$433kEmployment$418kPhilanthropy$63kMembership Benefit$42kCommunity Improvement$12k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $98,750, the rows itemized in this filing. The $144,836 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $46,086 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 · $16k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $30k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $53k
$30,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$54M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE$52,750
ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 189$30,000
CMRAVE$8,500
CHICAGO ROOFERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION$7,500
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 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 76% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 135: $12k → 11%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 96: $34k → 7%CMRAVE: $9k → 14%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 182: $12k → 9%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 70: $25k → 5%UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $39k → 4%UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $64k → 10%ROOFERS LOCAL 106: $12k → 15%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 75: $17k → 14%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 189: $30k → 12%KALKREUTH ROOFING CHARITIES: $8k → 15%CHICAGO ROOFERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $12k → 7%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 96: $33k → 7%CMRAVE: $9k → 14%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 182: $8k → 9%UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $38k → 4%UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $61k → 10%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 189: $30k → 12%KALKREUTH ROOFING CHARITIES: $8k → 15%CHICAGO ROOFERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $8k → 7%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 96: $22k → 7%CMRAVE: $6k → 14%UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $53k → 10%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 189: $30k → 12%KALKREUTH ROOFING CHARITIES: $8k → 15%CHICAGO ROOFERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $8k → 7%CMRAVE: $6k → 14%UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $50k → 10%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 189: $30k → 12%CHICAGO ROOFERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $8k → 7%UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $46k → 10%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 189: $30k → 12%CHICAGO ROOFERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $6k → 7%UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $42k → 10%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 189: $30k → 12%UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $40k → 10%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 189: $30k → 12%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 189: $30k → 12%ROOFERS LOCAL UNION 189: $30k → 12%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
MN
IL
MI
IA
IN
OH
WV
AZ
TN
DC
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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$902k · 7 repeat orgs$66k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +27% since the first grant, against +3% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
4

Total granted

$902k
$66k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
+3%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
PhilanthropyEnvironmentCommunity ImprovementEmploymentOther
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

  • US
    UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE
    9× · 2017–2025 · $433k · revenue +6%
  • UU
    UNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS AND ALLIED WORKERS 189 RDWA
    9× · 2017–2025 · $270k · revenue +15%
  • UU
    UNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS & ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL 96
    3× · 2019–2021 · $88k · revenue +27%

Funded once

  • RU
    ROOFER'S UNION LOCAL #70
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +3%
  • UU
    UNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS & ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL 75
    one grant, 2017 · $17k · revenue -1%
  • UU
    UNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS AND ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL UNION #135
    one grant, 2017 · $12k
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
Roofers Local Union No 81

To serve the interest of members and to encourage members to improve working condition and protect them from unjust and unfair labor practice.

—
2
Roofing Contractors Association

The organization represents its members in labor negotiations with the united union of roofers, waterproofers and allied workers local union 30.

—
3
International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers Local Union No 1

Collective bargaining representation on behalf of members.

—
4
United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America Lu No 315

Labor union

—
5
Plumbers and Pipefitters Local Union No 441

Union purposes include negotiating fair wages, safe working conditions, job protection and education of its members. membership consists of journeymen and apprentices of the plumbing and pipefitting industry.

—
6
Carpenters Union Local 1306

Representing members in matters of collective bargaining.

—
7
Road Sprinkler Fitters Local Union No 669 Ua

Members are represented to further work in a safe and fair workplace for a negotiated wage.

—
8
International Union of Operating Engineers Local 624

The organization is a trade union that represents operating engineers, who work as heavy equipment operators, mechanics,and surveyors in the construction industry, and stationary engineers, who work in operations and maintenance in…

—
9
United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America Local 619

A membership organization providing training, leadership and support for local labor union members.

—
10
United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America Local Union No 106

Labor union

—
11
Plumbers & Pipefitters Local 421

The Union and its employees work for the benefit of its membership including negotiations of wages, benefits and working conditions.

—
12
United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices for the Plumbing and Pipef

The local union acts as the collective bargaining agent for its members

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Union of Roofers Local 106; the most unlike its peers is Center for Military Recruitment Assessment and Veterans Employment. 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

11 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $432,550 · EnvironmentUNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCEUNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS AND ALLIED WORKERS 189 RDWA: $270,000 · OtherUNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS AND ALLIED W…UNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS & ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL 96: $87,500 · OtherUNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS & ALLIED WOR…ROOFER'S UNION LOCAL #70: $25,492 · OtherROOFER'S UNION LOCAL #70UNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOF AND ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL 182: $20,000 · OtherUNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS & ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL 75: $16,500 · Other+1 more: $11,988 · OtherCHICAGO ROOFERS AND WATERPROOFERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $40,500 · PhilanthropyKALKREUTH ROOFING CHARITIES INC: $22,500 · PhilanthropyCENTER FOR MILITARY RECRUITMENT ASSESSMENT AND VETERANS EMPLOYMENT: $29,000 · EmploymentUNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS AND ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL UNION #135: $12,000 · Community Improvement
Environment$432,550Other$431,480Philanthropy$63,000Employment$29,000Community Improvement$12,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNION SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE: $432,550 over 9y, 1.5% of budgetUNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS AND ALLIED WORKERS 189 RDWA: $270,000 over 9y, 13% of budgetUNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS & ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL 96: $87,500 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetCHICAGO ROOFERS AND WATERPROOFERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $40,500 over 5y, 11% of budgetCENTER FOR MILITARY RECRUITMENT ASSESSMENT AND VETERANS EMPLOYMENT: $29,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetROOFER'S UNION LOCAL #70: $25,492 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetKALKREUTH ROOFING CHARITIES INC: $22,500 over 3y, 18% of budgetUNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOF AND ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL 182: $20,000 over 2y, 5.7% of budgetUNITED UNION OF ROOFERS WATERPROOFERS & ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL 75: $16,500 over 1y, 9.0% of budgetUNITED UNION OF ROOFERS LOCAL 106: $11,988 over 1y, 2.3% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization United Union of Roofers Waterproofers and Allied Workers funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Union of Roofers Waterproofers and Allied Workers. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%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 11 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 United Union of Roofers Waterproofers and Allied Workers’ 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