Skip to content
America Scores at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

America Scores

The mission of The SCORES Network is to inspire youth to lead healthy lives be engaged students and have the confidence and character to make a difference in the world.

$63k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2025.

Youth Development$406kRecreation & Sports$66k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $50,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $63,321 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $13,321 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.
$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$521k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
America SCORES Milwaukee$50,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY23–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 78% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Boston SCORES: $22k → 16%America SCORES Bay Area: $43k → 10%America SCORES LA: $9k → 14%America SCORES New York: $33k → 17%DC SCORES: $61k → 14%America SCORES Milwaukee: $50k → 17%America SCORES Cleveland: $13k → 17%America SCORES Seattle: $8k → 9%America SCORES Chicago: $15k → 14%Boston SCORES: $22k → 16%America SCORES Bay Area: $43k → 10%America SCORES LA: $9k → 14%America SCORES New York: $33k → 17%DC SCORES: $61k → 14%America SCORES Milwaukee: $8k → 17%America SCORES Cleveland: $13k → 17%America SCORES Seattle: $8k → 9%America SCORES Chicago: $15k → 14%America SCORES Milwaukee: $8k → 17%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
IL
WI
NY
MA
OH
CA
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$471k · 9 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
0

Total granted

$471k
$0

Still filing today

100%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
Recreation & SportsYouth DevelopmentPublic 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

  • DS
    DC SCORES
    2× · 2023–2024 · $121k · revenue +26%
  • BA
    BAY AREA SCORES
    2× · 2023–2024 · $87k · revenue +20%
  • MILWAUKEE KICKERS SOCCER CLUB INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $66k · revenue +6%

Funded once

    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
    America Scores

    The mission of The SCORES Network is to inspire youth to lead healthy lives be engaged students and have the confidence and character to make a difference in the world. We achieve this mission through daily after-school and summer…

    Crime & Legal
    2
    America Scores Miami Inc

    Miami Scores inspires youth to lead healthy lives be engaged students and have the confidence and character to make a difference in the world.

    Education
    3
    Cold Spring Area Soccer Club
    —
    4
    West Central Soccer Association

    Childrens Recreational Sports Association

    Recreation & Sports
    5
    Rye Youth Soccer Club Inc

    The program was formed to foster, promote, encourage and support the playing of soccer in the city of rye, new york.

    —
    6
    Aurora Usa Soccer Academy

    Community youth activity

    —
    7
    Ohio Scholastic Soccer Coaches Association

    Awards to benefit boys/girls high school soccer players in ohio

    Youth Development
    8
    Lawrenceburg Greendale Soccer Club

    Soccer programming for youth in the cities of Lawrenceburg, IN and Greendale IN.

    Recreation & Sports
    9
    Greater Cleveland Co Soccer Assoc
    Recreation & Sports
    10
    Sugar City Soccer League
    Recreation & Sports
    11
    International Soccer Club
    Recreation & Sports
    12
    North Shore United Soccer Club Inc

    Recreation Youth Soccer

    Recreation & Sports
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bay Area Scores; the most unlike its peers is Milwaukee Kickers Soccer Club Inc. 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.

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

    0
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    1
    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

    DC SCORES: $121,334 · OtherDC SCORESMILWAUKEE KICKERS SOCCER CLUB INC: $65,600 · OtherMILWAUKEE KICKERS SOCCER CLUB INCAmerica SCORES Chicago: $30,334 · OtherAmerica SCORES ChicagoAMERICA SCORES CLEVELAND: $26,000 · OtherAMERICA SCORES CLEVELANDNEW YORK SCORES: $65,000 · Youth DevelopmentNEW YORK SCORESAmerica Scores New England DBA Boston Scores: $43,334 · Youth DevelopmentAmerica Scores New England…BAY AREA SCORES: $86,667 · Recreation & SportsBAY AREA SCORESAMERICA SCORES LA: $17,334 · Recreation & SportsAMERICA SCORES LAAMERICA SCORES SEATTLE: $15,600 · Public Benefit
    Other$243,268Youth Development$108,334Recreation & Sports$104,001Public Benefit$15,600

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

    25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDC SCORES: $121,334 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetBAY AREA SCORES: $86,667 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetMILWAUKEE KICKERS SOCCER CLUB INC: $65,600 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetNEW YORK SCORES: $65,000 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetAmerica Scores New England DBA Boston Scores: $43,334 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetAmerica SCORES Chicago: $30,334 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetAMERICA SCORES CLEVELAND: $26,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetAMERICA SCORES LA: $17,334 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetAMERICA SCORES SEATTLE: $15,600 over 2y, 5.1% 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.

    Good Sports IncDick's Sporting Goods…Laureus Sport for Goo…Rite Aid Healthy Futu…Charities Aid Foundat…American Online Givin…Paypal Charitable Giv…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
    Good Sports IncMA19.3× affinity7 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Good Sports Inc · Dick's Sporting Goods Foundation · Laureus Sport for Good Foundation USA · Rite Aid Healthy Futures · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
    • America Scores New England Dba Boston Scores: 30% of income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 America Scores?

    Find your warmest path to America Scores 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 9 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 America Scores’ 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