· Public charity
United States Polo Association Inc
The association has been organized and exists for the purposes of promoting the game of polo with an overarching goal of improving the sport, coordinating the activities of its member clubs and registered players, arranging, allocating, and supervising polo tournaments, competitions and games and providing rules, handicaps and conditions…
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 94 grants below total $2,172,988 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $3,169,627 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $996,639 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 $10k25 grants · $173k
- $10k–50k62 grants · $1.4M
- $50k–250k7 grants · $586k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HOUSTON POLO CLUB | $119,080 |
| DFW POLO ASSOCIATION | $117,412 |
| SANTA BARBARA POLO & RAQUET CLUB | $80,168 |
| RANCHO SILVERADO STABLES LLC DBA OC POLO | $70,484 |
| SCHOLARSHIP AMERICA INC | $68,000 |
| OF HORSE YOU CAN DBA DENVER POLO CLUB | $66,484 |
| WELLINGTON POLO TOUR INC | $64,080 |
| US ARENA POLO | $48,130 |
| LAS BRISAS POLO CLUB LLC | $43,175 |
| BRIDGEHAMPTION POLO CLUB DBA HAMPTONS POLO CLUB | $43,000 |
| VIRGINIA POLO INC | $42,030 |
| PORT MAYACA POLO CLUB INC | $41,325 |
| LA HERRADURA DE PALM BEACH INC | $41,275 |
| TEXAS ARENA LEAGUE | $39,380 |
| POLO OPCO LLC | $39,000 |
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, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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
Grants abroad, by region — $566k on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions, $116k to organizations and $450k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: TEAM USPA · YOUNG PLAYER OUTREACH · MILITARY INCENTIVE PROGRAM
Stated purpose: COMM - SAFETY GRANT · YOUNG PLAYER OUTREACH · PRIZE MONEY
Stated purpose: CLUB AND MEMBERSHIP DEVELOPMENT · YOUNG PLAYER OUTREACH · NYTS PLAYER REIMBURSEMENT
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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.
136 repeat relationships — 82 still active in FY2024, 54 since wound down; 12 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, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $231k 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
- HPHOUSTON POLO CLUB8× · 2017–2024 · $498k · revenue +42%
SCHOLARSHIP AMERICA INC6× · 2019–2024 · $429k · revenue +26%- SBSANTA BARBARA POLO & RACQUET CLUB MANAGEMENT CO INC8× · 2017–2024 · $367k · revenue +21%
Funded once
- PCPILOT CATASTROPHE SERVICES INCone grant, 2019 · $1.0M
- SPSCONE POLO LIMITEDone grant, 2021 · $325k
- LMLAS MONJITAS POLO INCone grant, 2020 · $100k
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.
Foster amateure competition in the sport of polo
Education and training of amateur polo athletes and the fostering of national and international amateur polo sport competition.
Encourage the growth of polo by running and supporting training programs for players at all levels.
Use Polo Tournament forums to procure sponsorships for improving healthcare services by providing financial assistance to patients and medical practitioners in need.
The mission of the amiercan polocrosse association is to offer educational programs which promote sportsmanship through domestic and international player developent programs and to teach horsemanship for the protections and welfare of the…
The purpose of the gpl polo club is to foster, educate, train, promote and support lgbt community members competing in the sport of polo on a local, regional, national and international basis. our parallel purpose is to advance equality…
Midland polo inc ('mp') was established as a membership-driven community organization to promote the awareness, education, history for the sport of polo while also being a community resource for equine therapy and for those in the…
Equine welfare
To focus on water polo fundamentals and positve mentoring which builds our athletes into champions, and provides benefits that transcend our sport and help our families and communtity thrive.
To enhance women's polo around the world by building an online community that includes detailed player profiles and a comprehensive global calendar of women's tournaments.
Foothill club water polo is dedicated to providing programs for athletes of all ages, regardless of their exprience or skill level. to provide young athletes with a positive, constructive environment where young men and women can achieve…
Club to maximize waterpolo potential
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Houston Polo Club and the most unlike its peers is Culver Educational 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 15 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) — 13% of your grantees by number, and just 9% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% 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.
42 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 42 of the 215 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 HOUSTON POLO CLUB ↗
- Who funds SCHOLARSHIP AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds SANTA BARBARA POLO & RACQUET CLUB MANAGEMENT CO INC ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO POLO ASSOCIATION LEN MONSON TREASURER ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA POLO INC ↗
- Who funds DFW POLO ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Central Texas Polo Association ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL COAST POLO CLUB ↗
- Who funds YALE POLO AND EQUESTRIAN CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds BARRINGTON HILLS POLO CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds MYOPIA HUNT CLUB ↗
- Who funds Aiken Polo Club Inc ↗
- Who funds MASHOMACK POLO 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: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 United States Polo Association 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 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.