Skip to content
Usta Midwest Tennis & Education Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Usta Midwest Tennis & Education Foundation Inc

The mission is currently carried out in four ways: To provide tennis opportunities to all youth from all cultural and ethnic backgrounds To promote and develop youth tennis as an enjoyable lifetime sport that contributes to good health leadership education discipline and builds self-esteem To support programs that focus on creating…

$286k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Recreation & Sports$267kYouth Development$36kHealth$19kHuman Services$10kEducation$10kInternational$6k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $84,900, the rows itemized in this filing. The $285,716 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $200,816 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $22k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$4.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
USTA Midwest Section$50,000
Buddy Up Tennis Inc$11,500
Mid-South Illinois Tennis Associati$10,000
Todd Martin Youth Leadership$6,900
Cincinnati Tennis Foundation$6,500
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 (FY22–22, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%YMCA of Greater Kalamazoo: $10k → 12%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.
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$261k · 9 repeat orgs$86k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +65% since the first grant, against +38% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
11

Total granted

$261k
$86k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+65%
+38%

Still filing today

100%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’20’21’22’23’24
Recreation & SportsHealthYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesEducationInternationalOther
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

  • US
    UNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $80k · revenue +7%
  • TM
    TODD MARTIN DEVELOPMENT FUND
    3× · 2020–2024 · $36k · revenue +124%
  • US
    UNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $31k · revenue +23%

Funded once

  • GL
    GREAT LAKES ADAPTIVE SPORTS ASSOCIATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $11k · revenue +40%
  • YM
    YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF KALAMAZOOgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +34%
  • TT
    THRIVE THROUGH TENNIS FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +38%
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
Donkor Tennis & Education Foundation Inc
Recreation & Sports
2
United States Tennis Association Inc

Guided by the belief that lives can be transformed through the game of tennis USTA Chicago a District of the USTA Midwest Section creates sustains and grows enthusiasm for the game of tennis throughout Chicagoland. As the governing body…

—
3
United States Tennis Association Inc

The USTA Northern Illinois District is the local district of the USTA Midwest Section with the mission To Promote Develop and Service the Game of Tennis.

—
4
United States Tennis Association Inc

We offer many diverse programs for all ages to work toward our mission to promote develop grow and service the game of tennis.

—
5
Usta Midwest Tennis & Education Foundation Inc

The mission is currently carried out in four ways: To provide tennis opportunities to all youth from all cultural and ethnic backgrounds To promote and develop youth tennis as an enjoyable lifetime sport that contributes to good health…

Recreation & Sports
6
United States Tennis Association Inc

The Mission of the Wisconsin Tennis Association is to promote develop and service the game of tennis in the USTA Wisconsin District. Our charter is to focus on the establishment of competitive developmental educational and recreational…

—
7
United States Tennis Association Inc

The USTA Midwest - Southeastern Michigan District has one mission: To Grow and Promote Tennis in Southeastern Michigan. Serving nine counties Hillsdale Lenawee Livingston Macomb Monroe Oakland St. Clair Washtenaw and Wayne you will always…

—
8
Robinson Tennis Academy
Youth Development
9
Tennis for Life

Tennis for Life Foundation is dedicated to fostering mental wellness, emotional resilience, and suicide prevention through the transformative power of tennis.

Health
10
United States Tennis Association Inc

To promote the development of tennis as a means of healthful recreation and physical fitness and to foster amateur tennis tournaments and competition.

—
11
Deta Friends Inc

helping children with disabilities learn

Recreation & Sports
12
Get a Grip Tennis Association Inc
Youth Development
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Advantage Cleveland Tennis and Education Inc; the most unlike its peers is Accelerate4KIDS Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

16 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. 16 of the 20 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
16/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC: $80,000 · OtherUNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INCUNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC: $31,050 · OtherUNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INCEVANSVILLE AREA TENNIS PATRONS FND INCORPORATED: $25,875 · OtherEVANSVILLE AREA TENNIS PATRONS FND INCORPORATEDMILWAUKEE TENNIS AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $12,500 · OtherMILWAUKEE TENNIS AND EDUCATION FOUNDATIONDBA Children of the Rainforest Cir cle of Hearts: $8,000 · OtherGreater Akron Jr Team Tennis Assoc: $6,065 · Other+3 more: $16,525 · Other+3 moreTHE ACE PROJECT INC: $22,750 · Recreation & SportsTHE ACE PROJECT INCThe Cincinnati Tennis Foundation: $17,995 · Recreation & SportsThe Cincinnati Tennis Fo…ADVANTAGE CLEVELAND TENNIS AND EDUCATION INC: $16,250 · Recreation & SportsADVANTAGE CLEVELAND TENN…THRIVE THROUGH TENNIS FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsTHRIVE THROUGH TENNIS FO…SERVING UP HOPE INC: $8,500 · Recreation & SportsSERVING UP HOPE INCTODD MARTIN DEVELOPMENT FUND: $36,050 · Youth DevelopmentTODD MARTIN…BUDDY UP FOR LIFE INC: $18,910 · HealthBUDDY UP …GREAT LAKES ADAPTIVE SPORTS ASSOCIATION: $11,000 · HealthGREAT LAK…YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF KALAMAZOO: $10,000 · Human ServicesAccelerate4KIDS Foundation: $9,500 · EducationAMIGOS THE RICHMOND LATINO CENTER INC: $6,000 · International
Other$180,015Recreation & Sports$75,495Youth Development$36,050Health$29,910Human Services$10,000Education$9,500International$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC: $80,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTODD MARTIN DEVELOPMENT FUND: $36,050 over 3y, 5.4% of budgetUNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC: $31,050 over 3y, 6.6% of budgetEVANSVILLE AREA TENNIS PATRONS FND INCORPORATED: $25,875 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetTHE ACE PROJECT INC: $22,750 over 3y, 4.0% of budgetBUDDY UP FOR LIFE INC: $18,910 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetThe Cincinnati Tennis Foundation: $17,995 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetADVANTAGE CLEVELAND TENNIS AND EDUCATION INC: $16,250 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetMILWAUKEE TENNIS AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $12,500 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetGREAT LAKES ADAPTIVE SPORTS ASSOCIATION: $11,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetYOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF KALAMAZOO: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHRIVE THROUGH TENNIS FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetAccelerate4KIDS Foundation: $9,500 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetSERVING UP HOPE INC: $8,500 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetAMIGOS THE RICHMOND LATINO CENTER INC: $6,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetUNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC: $5,475 over 1y, 1.0% 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.

Usta Foundation Incor…United States Tennis …Jpmorgan Chase Founda…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Usta Foundation IncorporatedNY28.2× affinity11 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Usta Foundation Incorporated · United States Tennis Association Incorporated · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Usta Midwest Tennis & Education Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Usta Midwest Tennis & Education Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    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 20 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 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 Usta Midwest Tennis & Education’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