· Public charity
The Skatepark Project
THE SKATEPARK PROJECT helps underserved communities create safe and inclusive public skateparks for youth.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 13 grants below total $444,930 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $4,704,272 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $4,259,342 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 · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $179k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LITTLEFIELD COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION | $250,000 |
| WARM SPRINGS COMMUNITY ACTION TEAM | $40,000 |
| BROOKLYN BRIDGE MANHATTAN INC | $27,000 |
| LOCKPORT COMMUNITY SERVICES INC | $25,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL HOOD RESTORATION INC | $15,000 |
| ROSE CITY ROLLERS | $15,000 |
| SOCIAL IMPACT FUND | $15,000 |
| TUTIFRUITI SKATE INC | $12,430 |
| 4KINSHIPINSPIRING CHILDRENS FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| HAROLD HUNTER FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| EARTHHUB TV | $10,000 |
| SUPER SKATE POSSE | $8,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $7,500 |
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 (FY17–20, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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 0% since the first grant, against -9% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 26% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $318k 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
- SSKATEISTAN2× · 2022–2023 · $46k · revenue +7%
- MHMARTY HENNESSY INSPIRING CHILDREN FOUNDATION2× · 2023–2024 · $40k · revenue +10%
- ESEXPOSURE SKATE2× · 2017–2018 · $10k · revenue +512%
Funded once
- CPCHANDLER PARK CONSERVANCYone grant, 2020 · $375k · revenue -78% · 35% of their budget
- VOVILLAGE OF ELLICOTTVILLEone grant, 2022 · $300k
- TOTOWN OF SWEDENone grant, 2022 · $300k
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.
Asheville Skate Foundation (ASF) is the organization that creates, maintains and preserves public, DIY, and community space at The Foundy, the skateable sculpture park located in the heart of the River Arts District in Asheville, NC.…
To enrich the city of lebanon by cooperating with local skaters, businesses, and community at large to facilitate the construction of a public skatepark.
Advocacy, fundraising, and activation for action sports in Raleigh, North Carolina.
The Hawaii Skatepark Association is a 501c3 non profit organization Tax#82-2722780 organized and operated for the development of free state of the art skateparks ; Provide educational and outreach pertaining to the benefits of skateparks…
To raise funds to build the legends skateboard park in el campo, texas
To provide a skateboard park for public use
Our mission is to empower youth and marginalized genders including women non-binary, and trans folk, and build community through action sports skill-building, equipment sharing, and accessible community events. We seek to transform…
Clark park coalition exists to provide an array of diverse, high-quality recreational, educational, social and mentoring programs for southwest detroit families promoting skills development which helps our youth grow into responsible,…
Rjs Kids was founded with the intent to support underserved individuals that reside with-in the closed community of Vashon-Maury Island. The BARC skatepark was the result of a direct ask from community members
Providing outdoor education through skateboarding camps and lessons to local youth
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Harold Hunter Foundation and the most unlike its peers is The Thomas J Evans Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 16 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
53 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. 53 of the 113 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 CHANDLER PARK CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds SHERIFF PAL PROGRAM ↗
- Who funds LITTLEFIELD COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds GREATER OLEAN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION DBA CATTARAUGUS REGION COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WARM SPRINGS COMMUNITY ACTION TEAM ↗
- Who funds POWER HOUSE PRODUCTIONS ↗
- Who funds ACTION SPORTS KIDS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BROOKLYN BRIDGE MANHATTAN INC ↗
- Who funds SKATEISTAN ↗
- Who funds MARTY HENNESSY INSPIRING CHILDREN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Harold Hunter Foundation ↗
- Who funds HARNESS COMMUNITY ↗
- Who funds REDLANDS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds READING SKATEPARK ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds VERNONIA BOOSTER CLUB ↗
- Who funds WESTCHESTER PARKS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ALTURAS ROTARY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION ↗
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: Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · National Recreation and Park Association · AARP · Center for Technology and Civic Life · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Tides Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Local Initiatives Support Corporation · American Endowment Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust
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 The Skatepark Project 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.
- Warm Springs Community Action Team — 28% 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.