· Public charity
Usta Eastern Inc
Growing tennis to inspire healthier people and communities everywhere.
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 7 grants below total $321,253 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $568,039 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $246,786 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 $10k3 grants · $17k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $28k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $276k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CAPITAL REGION YOUTH TENNIS FOUNDATION INC | $211,153 |
| TOWN OF BETHLEHEM | $65,000 |
| JUNIOR TENNIS FOUNDATION INC | $18,000 |
| TOWN OF RENSSELAERVILLE | $10,000 |
| SUFFOLK COUNTY TENNIS & EDUCATION FDN INC | $6,400 |
| NYS Public High School Ath Assoc & TPG LLC | $5,500 |
| HARLEM JUNIOR TENNIS & EDU PROGRAM INC | $5,200 |
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 (FY17–21, $38k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 16% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
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 +101% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
17 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 4 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, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $86k 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
- CRCAPITAL REGION YOUTH TENNIS FOUNDATION INC7× · 2017–2024 · $264k · revenue +64%
- JTJUNIOR TENNIS FOUNDATION INC5× · 2017–2024 · $188k · revenue +264% · 42% of their budget
- SCSUFFOLK COUNTY TENNIS & EDUCATION FOUNDA6× · 2017–2024 · $74k · revenue +101% · 56% of their budget
Funded once
- COCITY OF SCHENECTADYone grant, 2018 · $75k
- GTGOLDBACK TENNIS CLUB INCone grant, 2018 · $34k
- MCMETROTENNIS COMMUNITY TENNIS ASSOCIATION LTDgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $30k · revenue +104%
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 promote and develop the game of tennis as a means to healthful recreation and physical fitness and to operate a year-round public recreational facility.
The usta mission is growing tennis to inspire healthier people and communities everywhere.usta is the national governing body for the sport of tennis and the recognized leader in promoting and developing the sport's growth on every level…
The primary purpose of the york adams community tennis association is to promote the development of tennis as a means of healthful recreation and physical fitness, and to cooperate with the middle states tennis association, united states…
The Princeton Tennis Program (PTP) is a nonprofit, year-round community tennis association serving youth and adults of the greater central New Jersey region. PTPs mission is growing the game of tennis by offering high quality group…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Kings County Tennis League and the most unlike its peers is Enrichment Center for Women Children & Families Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 21 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 13% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
24 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. 24 of the 68 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 CAPITAL REGION YOUTH TENNIS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds JUNIOR TENNIS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SUFFOLK COUNTY TENNIS & EDUCATION FOUNDA ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK JUNIOR TENNIS LEAGUE INC ↗
- Who funds KINGS COUNTY TENNIS LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds METROTENNIS COMMUNITY TENNIS ASSOCIATION LTD ↗
- Who funds THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF WATERTOWN NY INC ↗
- Who funds Puerto Rican Association For Human Development Incorporated ↗
- Who funds ESSEX GRASSROOTS TENNIS & EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds BUFFALO NIAGARA COMMUNITY TENNIS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds HQ TENNIS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CIRCULO DE LA HISPANIDAD INC ↗
- Who funds UTICAWON TENNIS INC ↗
- Who funds SOPHIE GERSON HEALTHY YOUTH INC ↗
- Who funds Research Foundation of the City University of New York ↗
- Who funds CITY PARKS FOUNDATION 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: Usta Foundation Incorporated · United States Tennis Association Incorporated · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Usta Eastern 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Usta Eastern Inc?
Find your warmest path to Usta Eastern 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.