Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Amateur Golf Alliance

Our mission is to provide the championship with its playability and unique hole designs in the dfw area.

$60k
Granted FY2019
5
Grants FY2019
5
States reached
$21k
Largest
01What you fund
01FY2019 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 5 grants below total $47,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $60,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $12,500 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.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k3 grants · $17k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $31k
$6,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$21k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Carolinas Golf Assn$20,500
Metropolitan Golf Assn$10,000
Florida State Golf Assn$6,000
Texas Golf Assn$5,500
Ohio Golf Assn$5,500
02The need
02

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–19) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 36% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Metropolitan Golf Assn: $10k → 9%Texas Golf Assn: $6k → 14%Florida State Golf Assn: $6k → 13%Carolinas Golf Assn: $21k → 10%Ohio Golf Assn: $6k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your field
03the grantee network

5 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 20172024, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/5
Grantees still filing
5/5
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CAROLINAS GOLF ASSOCIATION — $20,500 · Recreation & SportsCAROLINAS GOLF ASSOCIATIONFLORIDA STATE GOLF ASSOCIATION INC — $6,000 · Recreation & SportsFLORIDA STATE GOLF ASSOCIATION INCMETROPOLITAN GOLF ASSOCIATION INC — $10,000 · OtherMETROPOLITAN GOLF ASSOCIATION INCOHIO GOLF ASSOCIATION — $5,500 · OtherOHIO GOLF ASSOCIATIONTHE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION — $5,500 · OtherTHE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION
Recreation & Sports$26,500Other$21,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMETROPOLITAN GOLF ASSOCIATION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFLORIDA STATE GOLF ASSOCIATION INC — $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION — $5,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

United States Golf AssociationNJ15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United States Golf Association

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 Amateur Golf Alliance 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.

2024
2021222324
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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, FY2024

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 5 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $40k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2019, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph