· Public charity
Professional Tennis Registry Foundation
The PTR Foundation provides grants to organizations and individuals in order to advance participation in the sport of tennis regardless of age or physical abilities.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 5 grants below total $25,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $49,833 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $24,833 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Piedmont Area Tennis Association | $5,000 |
| NYPD Tennis Association | $5,000 |
| Ashville Tennis Association | $5,000 |
| Dream Court | $5,000 |
| Panda Foundation | $5,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY24–24, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +42% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- SBSWEET BRIAR INSTITUTE2× · 2018–2020 · $35k · revenue +22%
- PTPROFESSIONAL TENNIS REGISTRY2× · 2018–2020 · $19k · revenue +42%
- SOSPECIAL OLYMPICS SOUTH CAROLINA2× · 2020–2024 · $14k · revenue +81%
Funded once
- STSOUTHERN TENNIS PATRONS FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $16k · revenue ×78
- FCFUTURE CHAMPIONS FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2020 · $10k
- UHUSTA HAWAII PACIFIC INCone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue +13%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To develop, maintain, and promote the game of tennis.
The association's mission to promote and develop the growth the tennis is only enhanced by leveraging diversity and creating an inclusive environment. we are committed to ensuring that people of all backgrounds have access to and feel…
Growing tennis to inspire healthier people and communities everywhere.
Organization mission is to educate and train individuals for the purpose of improving or developing their capabilities in the sport of pop tennis.
To provide and develop tennis throughout north carolina by way of recreational leagues and tournaments. to reach out to people that might not already play through community development programs.
Provide support system and training for aspiring tennis players
The National Tennis Foundations Mission is to identify children with economic need regardless of race or economic means, using sport, academic, or mental support programs to give children in need a positive, impactful and nurturing…
The PTR Foundation provides grants to organizations and individuals in order to advance participation in the sport of tennis regardless of age or physical abilities. The goal is to make tennis available to everyone of all back rounds in…
To foster the development and playing of court tennis by supporting national and international amateur competition and by developing amateur court tennis players.
Mission to introduce tennis and educational opportunities to under-served youth in the low-country of South Carolina and to provide continued training and support for youth who show commitment, character and potential to play tennis at a…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Usta Hawaii Pacific Inc and the most unlike its peers is Professional Tennis Registry. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 13 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds SWEET BRIAR INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds PROFESSIONAL TENNIS REGISTRY ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN TENNIS PATRONS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS SOUTH CAROLINA ↗
- Who funds FUTURE CHAMPIONS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PANDA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds USTA HAWAII PACIFIC INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH CAROLINA TENNIS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SERVING UP HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds LOVE SERVING AUTISM INC ↗
- Who funds DREAM COURT INC ↗
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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: United States Tennis Association Incorporated · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Professional Tennis Registry Foundation 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Professional Tennis Registry Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Professional Tennis Registry Foundation 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.