· 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…
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 5 grants below total $84,900 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $285,716 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $200,816 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 · $13k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $22k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| 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 |
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 (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 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.
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 +71% since the first grant, against +38% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- USUNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC2× · 2023–2024 · $80k · revenue +7%
- TMTODD MARTIN DEVELOPMENT FUND3× · 2020–2024 · $36k · revenue +100%
- USUNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC3× · 2022–2024 · $31k · revenue +23%
Funded once
- GLGREAT LAKES ADAPTIVE SPORTS ASSOCIATIONgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $11k · revenue +40%
- TTTHRIVE THROUGH TENNIS FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +38%
- YMYOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF KALAMAZOOgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +34%
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.
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…
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.
We offer many diverse programs for all ages to work toward our mission to promote develop grow and service the game of tennis.
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…
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…
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…
Tennis for Life Foundation is dedicated to fostering mental wellness, emotional resilience, and suicide prevention through the transformative power of tennis.
To promote the development of tennis as a means of healthful recreation and physical fitness and to foster amateur tennis tournaments and competition.
helping children with disabilities learn
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Advantage Cleveland Tennis and Education Inc and 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.
16 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. 16 of the 20 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 UNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds TODD MARTIN DEVELOPMENT FUND ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds EVANSVILLE AREA TENNIS PATRONS FND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds THE ACE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds BUDDY UP FOR LIFE INC ↗
- Who funds The Cincinnati Tennis Foundation ↗
- Who funds ADVANTAGE CLEVELAND TENNIS AND EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds MILWAUKEE TENNIS AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GREAT LAKES ADAPTIVE SPORTS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THRIVE THROUGH TENNIS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds YOUNG MENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF KALAMAZOO ↗
- Who funds Accelerate4KIDS Foundation ↗
- Who funds SERVING UP HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds AMIGOS THE RICHMOND LATINO CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES TENNIS ASSOCIATION 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 · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Midwest Tennis & Education Foundation 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.