Skip to content

· Public charity

Junior Tennis Foundation Inc

The junior tennis foundation, inc.

$96k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$11k
Largest
01What it funds
0190% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Recreation & Sports$255kCommunity Improvement$25kHuman Services$16kCivil Rights$7kYouth Development$6kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $71,250, the rows itemized in this filing. The $96,227 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $24,977 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $30k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $41k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$624k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$11,300
NY Junior Tennis League$10,000
Kings County Tennis League$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
Capital Region Youth Tennis$9,000
YMCA OF GREATER ROCHESTER$8,000
Asian American Pacific Island$6,950
LIFE SERVE YOUTH FOUNDATION$6,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–24, $29k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 55% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%Hero Inc: $6k → 9%YMCA OF GREATER ROCHESTER: $8k → 14%Hero Inc Adapted Tennis: $7k → 9%YMCA OF GREATER ROCHESTER: $8k → 14%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.
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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$267k · 8 repeat orgs$72k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
5

Total granted

$267k
$59k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+68%

Still filing today

63%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Recreation & SportsHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • CR
    CAPITAL REGION YOUTH TENNIS FOUNDATION INC
    6× · 2017–2024 · $82k · revenue +64%
  • CP
    CITY PARKS FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $36k · revenue +29%
  • KC
    KINGS COUNTY TENNIS LEAGUE
    3× · 2022–2024 · $36k · revenue +82%

Funded once

  • RC
    RBC Capital Markets LLC
    one grant, 2020 · $25k
  • JM
    JOHNNY MAC TENNIS PROJECT INC
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +24%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
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
Donkor Tennis & Education Foundation Inc
Recreation & Sports
2
Vineyard Youth Tennnisinc
Recreation & Sports
3
Tenacity Inc

The organization's mission is youth development and life-skill development activities.

Recreation & Sports
4
New York Junior Tennis League Inc

To develop the character of young people through tennis and education, emphasizing the ideals and life of arthur ashe. see part iii, line 1 for more detail.

—
5
Robinson Tennis Academy
Youth Development
6
Crossroads Tennis Association
—
7
Patrick W Ryan Memorial Tennis Foundation Inc
Recreation & Sports
8
Tennis for Life

Tennis for Life Foundation is dedicated to fostering mental wellness, emotional resilience, and suicide prevention through the transformative power of tennis.

Health
9
Usta National Tennis Center Incorporated

To promote and develop the game of tennis as a means to healthful recreation and physical fitness and to operate a year-round public recreational facility.

Recreation & Sports
10
Tennis Nrg Charitable Tennis Nrg Charitable

Provide support system and training for aspiring tennis players

Youth Development
11
Denver Tennis Park

The denver tennis park was founded to operate a youth-serving tennis facility and conduct related programs and activities which serve denver public schools, the university of denver, youth outreach, and the general public.

Recreation & Sports
12
Deta Friends Inc

helping children with disabilities learn

Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Johnny Mac Tennis Project Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hero 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

8 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. 8 of the 15 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CAPITAL REGION YOUTH TENNIS FOUNDATION INC: $82,000 · Recreation & SportsCAPITAL REGION YOUTH TENNIS FOUNDATION INCCITY PARKS FOUNDATION INC: $36,000 · Recreation & SportsCITY PARKS FOUNDATION INCKINGS COUNTY TENNIS LEAGUE: $36,000 · Recreation & SportsKINGS COUNTY TENNIS LEAGUESERVE AND RETURN INC: $6,000 · Recreation & SportsIndividual grant recipient: $35,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientRBC Capital Markets LLC: $25,000 · OtherRBC Capital Markets LLCNY Junior Tennis League: $24,500 · OtherNY Junior Tennis LeagueIndividual grant recipient: $24,393 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $8,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientAsian American Pacific Island: $6,950 · OtherYMCA OF GREATER ROCHESTER (4368): $16,000 · Human ServicesYMCA OF G…HERO INC: $13,315 · Human ServicesHERO INCJOHNNY MAC TENNIS PROJECT INC: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentLIFE SERVE YOUTH FOUNDATION INC: $6,000 · Youth Development
Recreation & Sports$160,000Other$133,843Human Services$29,315Youth Development$16,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCAPITAL REGION YOUTH TENNIS FOUNDATION INC: $82,000 over 6y, 4.5% of budgetCITY PARKS FOUNDATION INC: $36,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetKINGS COUNTY TENNIS LEAGUE: $36,000 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetYMCA OF GREATER ROCHESTER (4368): $16,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHERO INC: $13,315 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetJOHNNY MAC TENNIS PROJECT INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSERVE AND RETURN INC: $6,000 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetLIFE SERVE YOUTH FOUNDATION INC: $6,000 over 1y, 6.7% 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.

  • Who funds CAPITAL REGION YOUTH TENNIS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CITY PARKS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds KINGS COUNTY TENNIS LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds YMCA OF GREATER ROCHESTER (4368) ↗
  • Who funds HERO INC ↗
  • Who funds JOHNNY MAC TENNIS PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds SERVE AND RETURN INC ↗
  • Who funds LIFE SERVE YOUTH FOUNDATION INC ↗

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.

Usta Foundation IncorporatedNY15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Usta Foundation Incorporated · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Junior Tennis Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Junior Tennis Foundation Inc. 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%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 Junior Tennis Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Junior Tennis Foundation 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 15 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Junior Tennis’ filings →

    More from the funding graph