Skip to content
Active City Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Active City Inc

Active City strives to work with community stakeholders to transform Hartford into Americas most physically active city for children.

$98k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2025.

Recreation & Sports$209kCommunity Improvement$125kReligion$79kYouth Development$57kEducation$23kHuman Services$12kPublic Benefit$8kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $80,167, the rows itemized in this filing. The $98,167 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $18,000 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 $10k3 grants · $19k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $61k
$11,979
Median grant
1
States reached
$423k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CT Lady Canes$20,488
2-4-1 CARE$15,000
Hartford Knights Corp$13,500
YMCA of Metro Hartford$11,979
Connecticut Scholars Incorpor$6,800
Hartford Soccer Club Inc$6,500
Hartford Premier Developmt Le$5,900
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.

None of its grants could be placed against low income need for this view.

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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$499k · 13 repeat orgs$61k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +52% since the first grant, against -25% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
2

Total granted

$499k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+52%
-25%

Still filing today

46%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $46k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
Recreation & SportsYouth DevelopmentReligionCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesOther
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

  • HS
    HARTFORD SOCCER CLUB INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $78k
  • HP
    Hartford Premier & Developmt
    4× · 2022–2025 · $77k
  • NB
    NEW BIRTH TABERNACLE MINISTRIES
    3× · 2022–2024 · $50k

Funded once

  • MM
    Mayor Mike Peters LLC
    one grant, 2023 · $8k
  • CO
    CHARTER OAK AMATEUR BOXING ACADEMY AND YOUTH DEV PROGRAM INC
    one grant, 2024 · $7k · revenue -25%
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
Stratford High School Lacrosse

Youth Sports activities

Recreation & Sports
2
Youth Soccer Association of New Haven Inc

Develop local youth in soccer skills and team play

—
3
Ha Raiders Youth Sports

We provide youth sports training year round. We provide practice and game fields all league and tournament fees insurance uniforms equipment etc.

Youth Development
4
Holbrook Youth Basketballl

Youth basketball instruction

—
5
Just Amazing Youth Sports Inc
Youth Development
6
Hartford Lions Soccer Academy

Youth Sports and Life Skills

Youth Development
7
Helping Hands Youth Center

Youth Athletic program

Youth Development
8
Warde Football Gridiron

Teaching team building and sportsmanship to young adults

Recreation & Sports
9
Hampshire Youth Football & Cheerleading

Provide cheerleading and football to all children in the hampshire area and surrounding communities, the process that involves traing volunteers and preparing for the season

Education
10
Rochester Police Athletic League

Youth & Police Positive Relatio

Youth Development
11
West Hempfield Athletic Association Inc
Recreation & Sports
12
Lynn Haven Raiders Youth Athletic Association Inc

Promote Sports and fitness activities for youth.

Youth Development
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hartford Knights Corp; the most unlike its peers is Greater Joy Mission Church. 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

9 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. 9 of the 18 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

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

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HARTFORD SOCCER CLUB INC: $77,677 · OtherHARTFORD SOCCER CLUB INCHartford Premier & Developmt: $77,144 · OtherHartford Premier & DevelopmtNEW BIRTH TABERNACLE MINISTRIES: $50,190 · OtherNEW BIRTH TABERNACLE MINISTRIESGrants Less Than 5000: $45,588 · OtherGrants Less Than 5000Hartford Hurricanes Baseball: $34,951 · OtherHartford Hurricanes BaseballCT Social Architects LLC: $31,083 · OtherCT Social Architects LLCCONNECTICUT SCHOLARS INCORPORATED: $23,085 · OtherCONNECTICUT SCHOLARS INCORPORATEDCT Lady Canes: $20,488 · OtherCT Lady Canes+1 more: $8,250 · Other2-4-1 Care Inc: $46,729 · Recreation & Sports2-4-1 Care IncAMERICAN YOUTH FOOTBALL INC HARTFORD WILDCATS INC: $29,554 · Recreation & SportsAMERICAN YOUTH F…CHARTER OAK AMATEUR BOXING ACADEMY AND YOUTH DEV PROGRAM INC: $6,905 · Recreation & SportsCHARTER OAK AMAT…HARTFORDS PROUD DRILL DRUM & DANCE CORP: $21,749 · Youth DevelopmentHARTFORDS …The Police Activities League of Hartford Incorporated: $14,943 · Youth DevelopmentThe Police…HARTFORD KNIGHTS CORP: $13,500 · Youth DevelopmentHARTFORD K…GREATER JOY MISSION CHURCH: $29,250 · ReligionRich Dae Entrepreneur Foundation: $17,097 · Community ImprovementYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF METROPOLITAN HARTFORD INC: $11,979 · Human Services
Other$368,456Recreation & Sports$83,188Youth Development$50,192Religion$29,250Community Improvement$17,097Human Services$11,979

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 budget2-4-1 Care Inc: $46,729 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetAMERICAN YOUTH FOOTBALL INC HARTFORD WILDCATS INC: $29,554 over 3y, 8.5% of budgetGREATER JOY MISSION CHURCH: $29,250 over 2y, 46% of budgetHARTFORDS PROUD DRILL DRUM & DANCE CORP: $21,749 over 2y, 20% of budgetRich Dae Entrepreneur Foundation: $17,097 over 2y, 38% of budgetThe Police Activities League of Hartford Incorporated: $14,943 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetCHARTER OAK AMATEUR BOXING ACADEMY AND YOUTH DEV PROGRAM INC: $6,905 over 1y, 1.1% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Hartford Foundation f…Fidelity Investments …
Hartford Foundation for Public GivingCT19.4× affinity7 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Hartford Foundation for Public Giving · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Active City Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Active City Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 70%
  • The Police Activities League of Hartford Incorporated: 70% of income from government
  • Hartford Knights Corp: 68% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely on government for over half their income
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Active City Inc?

Find your warmest path to Active City 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.

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 18 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 Active City’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