Skip to content
The Kate Risley Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

The Kate Risley Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$102k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$31k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Recreation & Sports$391kYouth Development$173kEducation$66kPublic Benefit$46kHuman Services$27kFood & Nutrition$2kArts & Culture$750
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $89k
$13,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HARLEM LACROSSE AND LEADERSHIP CORPORATION$31,000
BRIDGE DALLAS LACROSSE INC$20,000
PHILADELPHIA YOUTH ORGANIZATION$15,000
YWCA CENTRAL MAINE$13,000
GIRLS ON THE RUN - DC$10,000
GIRLS ON THE RUN INTERNATIONAL$6,500
WASHINGTON INNER CITY LACROSSE$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 (FY20–24, $27k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%YWCA CENTRAL MAINE: $13k → 13%YWCA CENTRAL MAINE: $8k → 13%YWCA CENTRAL MAINE: $4k → 13%YWCA CENTRAL MAINE: $1k → 13%YWCA CENTRAL MAINE: $750 → 13%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

ME
MN
NY
MA
OH
PA
CA
MD
AZ
DC
TX
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 11% of The Kate Risley Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Kate Risley Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$676k · 10 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +64% since the first grant, against +48% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
13

Total granted

$676k
$30k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+64%
+48%

Still filing today

100%
54%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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 & SportsYouth DevelopmentEducationHuman ServicesFood & NutritionOther
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

  • HL
    HARLEM LACROSSE AND LEADERSHIP CORPORATION
    7× · 2018–2024 · $157k · revenue +203%
  • BL
    BRIDGE LACROSSE DALLAS INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $121k · revenue +139%
  • WI
    WASHINGTON INNER CITY LACROSSE FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $92k · revenue +60%

Funded once

  • CL
    CITY LACROSSE
    one grant, 2017 · $12k
  • HL
    HOMEGROWN LACROSSEgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue +48%
  • THE COLLEGE OF WOOSTER
    one grant, 2018 · $3k · revenue +16%
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
Stratford High School Lacrosse

Youth Sports activities

Recreation & Sports
2
Caledonia Lacrosse Association

Girls and boys school lacrosse program

Recreation & Sports
3
Clackamas Youth Lacrosse Inc

Clackamas youth lacrosse provides an opportunity for youth to learn and play the growing sport of lacrosse. girls and boys in grades 3 through 8 in the north clackamas school district attendance area are served by this organization.

—
4
Detroit United Lacrosse Association

The Detroit United Lacrosse Association is a citywide youth organization dedicated to developing student athletes of character and integrity who will serve as positive members of the community. Detroit United Lacrosse works directly with…

Youth Development
5
Friendswood Youth Lacrosse

The organizations purpose is to teach kids about perseverance athleticism and strategy through youth lacrosse.

Recreation & Sports
6
Cg Trojan Lacrosse Inc

Provide lacrosse instruction and competition for youth ages 8-18.

Recreation & Sports
7
Snolax Girls Lacrosse Club

To create an inclusive and safe environment for girls to learn and play lacrosse at the high school and youth level' snolax girls promotes a structured environment that spurs growth of the sport, the club, and its members as well as…

Recreation & Sports
8
Woodlands Junior High Lacrosse Club Dba Woodlands Youth Lacrosse Club

WOODLANDS JUNIOR HIGH LACROSSE CLUB IS dedicated to promoting Lacrosse at the youth level for families in The Woodlands, TX and surrounding area. IT striveS to develop strong fundamental skills and teamwork while adhering to the standards…

Recreation & Sports
9
Brooklyn Lacrosse Club Inc

Brooklyn Lacrosse Club makes youth lacrosse accessible and affordable across Brooklyn. Reducing barriers thru clinics, scholarships, equipment support, and character-focused development.

Recreation & Sports
10
Medina Youth Lacrosse Association

Medina youth lacrosse association is a not-for-profit community based all volunteer scholastic sports organization. mission it is the mission of myla to inspire the community of medina, ohio to be lifelong fans and enthusiastic supporters…

Recreation & Sports
11
Charm City Youth Lacrosse League Inc

To introduce and expand the Lacrosse Community into Baltimore City. This expansion is designed to provide and expand educationl opportunities for Baltimore City youth.

Recreation & Sports
12
Woodchuck Lacrosse Development Inc
Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Homegrown Lacrosse; the most unlike its peers is Dc Girls Baseball. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

20 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. 20 of the 23 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)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/20
Grantees still filing
16/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BRIDGE LACROSSE DALLAS INC: $120,558 · Youth DevelopmentBRIDGE LACROSSE DALLAS INCGIRLS ON THE RUN - DC: $93,500 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS ON THE RUN - DCPHILADELPHIA YOUTH ORGANIZATION: $64,255 · Youth DevelopmentPHILADELPHIA YOUTH ORGANIZATIONGirls on the Run - Western MA Council: $15,500 · Youth Development+1 more: $695 · Youth DevelopmentHARLEM LACROSSE AND LEADERSHIP CORPORATION: $156,550 · Recreation & SportsHARLEM LACROSSE AND LEADERSHIP CORPORATIO…WASHINGTON INNER CITY LACROSSE FOUNDATION: $92,000 · Recreation & SportsWASHINGTON INNER CITY LACROSSE FOUNDATION+3 more: $7,250 · Recreation & SportsTRUSTEES OF THE HAMLINE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $58,590 · EducationTRUSTEES O…THE COLLEGE OF WOOSTER: $3,000 · Education+2 more: $2,750 · EducationNEW NORTH CITIZENS COUNCIL INC: $46,450 · OtherNEW NORTH …CITY LACROSSE: $11,500 · OtherCITY LACRO…METROLACROSSE INC: $2,500 · Other+4 more: $2,704 · OtherYWCA Central Maine: $27,438 · Human ServicesFOOD FOR FREE COMMITTEE INC: $750 · Food & Nutrition
Youth Development$294,508Recreation & Sports$255,800Education$64,340Other$63,154Human Services$27,438Food & Nutrition$750

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHARLEM LACROSSE AND LEADERSHIP CORPORATION: $156,550 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetBRIDGE LACROSSE DALLAS INC: $120,558 over 8y, 9.4% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN - DC: $93,500 over 8y, 3.3% of budgetWASHINGTON INNER CITY LACROSSE FOUNDATION: $92,000 over 8y, 7.1% of budgetPHILADELPHIA YOUTH ORGANIZATION: $64,255 over 5y, 4.4% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE HAMLINE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $58,590 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetNEW NORTH CITIZENS COUNCIL INC: $46,450 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetYWCA Central Maine: $27,438 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetGirls on the Run - Western MA Council: $15,500 over 5y, 1.3% of budgetCITY LACROSSE: $11,500 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetHOMEGROWN LACROSSE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE COLLEGE OF WOOSTER: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMETROLACROSSE INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE WILLISTON NORTHAMPTON SCHOOL: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDream of Wild Health: $750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOOD FOR FREE COMMITTEE INC: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMIGHTY WRITERS: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPHILLY GIRLS IN MOTION INC: $695 over 1y, 0.5% 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 IncMightycause Charitabl…Charities Aid Foundat…The Bank of America C…Network for GoodNational Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Good Sports IncMA16.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Good Sports Inc · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 The Kate Risley Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Kate Risley Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 75%
  • New North Citizens Council Inc: 75% of income from government
  • Food for Free Committee Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 The Kate Risley Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Kate Risley 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 23 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-PF 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 Kate Risley’s 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