· Public charity
Squash and Education Alliance Inc
We strive to achieve our mission in three main ways: - growth: launch squash and education programs in new cities - program quality: ensure the highest quality programming among our members by identifying and sharing best practices, tracking data, evaluating programs, developing leaders, and creating opportunities to exchange ideas and…
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 13 grants below total $416,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $676,976 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $260,976 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 · FY2025
- $10k–50k10 grants · $266k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $150k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| METROsquash | $50,000 |
| Squash Haven | $50,000 |
| Racquet Up Detroit | $50,000 |
| SquashSmarts | $37,500 |
| Steel City Squash | $37,500 |
| Kids on Point | $35,000 |
| StreetSquash | $25,000 |
| Urban Squash Cleveland | $25,000 |
| Cincinnati Squash Academy | $25,000 |
| First State Squash | $25,000 |
| Mission Success | $25,000 |
| 716 Squash | $16,000 |
| Santa Barbara School of Squash | $15,000 |
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 (FY22–25, $151k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 47% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 11% of Squash and Education Alliance Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 -21% since the first grant, against -47% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 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, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k 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
- SISQUASHSMARTS INC3× · 2023–2025 · $122k · revenue +13%
- SHSQUASH HAVEN INC2× · 2023–2025 · $80k · revenue +100%
- ECEmanuel Community Center DBA Cincinnati Squash Academy3× · 2022–2025 · $71k · revenue +1%
Funded once
- SSQUASHDRIVEone grant, 2022 · $26k · revenue -59%
- CSCapitol Squash Incone grant, 2024 · $14k · revenue +21%
SQUASHBUSTERS INCone grant, 2022 · $8k · revenue -47%
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.
We strive to achieve our mission in three main ways: - growth: launch squash and education programs in new cities - program quality: ensure the highest quality programming among our members by identifying and sharing best practices,…
Squash and education alliance international inc. is a national governing organization that promotes and supports the development of squash and educational enrichment programs for urban and disadvantaged youth internationally.
The mission of squash on track is to aid underprivleged youth through free-of-charge lessons in the sport of squash and to provide other after-school support, including academic assistance.
Empowering marginalized youth to break barriers and build futures through sports, study and self-development.
Squashbridge will be a one-of-its-kind athletic, educational, and community center in bridgeport for people of all ages and backgrounds.
Create a platform incorporating art to educate the public on the health benefits of squash, increase youth participation in the sport, run events to raise awareness of the opportunities in the sport and help kids get admitted into top…
Promote sport of squash through informational tools, such as website, & encourage individuals to play squash by sponsoring & promoting tournaments.
The mission of rochester community squash is to foster the growth of squash as a life-long athletic pursuit providing not only a healthy activity for the greater rochester community, but also a safe, inclusive environment for area youth to…
A+ provides underserved atlanta youth with year-round academic, athletic & community programming to help them develop the skills and knowledge needed to graduate with the tools to become successful adults.
Washington Education & Squash Academy's mission is to offer a group of underprivileged students year-round intense squash instruction, academic tutoring and community service so that they recognize and fulfill their potential in life as…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Baltimore Squashwise Inc and the most unlike its peers is Portland Community Squash. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
20 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.
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 ACCESS YOUTH ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds First State Squash Inc ↗
- Who funds STEEL CITY SQUASH INC ↗
- Who funds BALTIMORE SQUASHWISE INC ↗
- Who funds City Squash Inc ↗
- Who funds METROSQUASH NFP ↗
- Who funds SQUASHSMARTS INC ↗
- Who funds Portland Community Squash ↗
- Who funds RACQUET UP DETROIT ↗
- Who funds SQUASH HAVEN INC ↗
- Who funds Emanuel Community Center DBA Cincinnati Squash Academy ↗
- Who funds KIDS ON POINT INC ↗
- Who funds STREETSQUASH INC ↗
- Who funds URBAN SQUASH CLEVELAND ↗
- Who funds SQUASHDRIVE ↗
- Who funds 716 Squash Inc ↗
- Who funds MISSION SQUASH OF HOUSTON ↗
- Who funds SANTA BARBARA SCHOOL OF SQUASH ↗
- Who funds Capitol Squash Inc ↗
- Who funds SQUASHBUSTERS 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: Dick's Sporting Goods Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Charities Aid Foundation America · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Baird Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc
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 Squash and Education Alliance Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Baltimore Squashwise Inc — 23% of income from government
- First State Squash Inc — 7% of income from government
- Squash Haven Inc — 4% of income from government
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.