· Public charity
Usta-Pacific Northwest Section
To promote the growth of tennis through engaging children, adults, and families in every neighborhood.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 49 grants below total $52,880 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $118,406 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $65,526 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ALASKA TENNIS ASSOCIATION INC | $2,300 |
| TENNIS OUTREACH PROGRAM OF PUGET SOUND | $1,900 |
| SOUTHRIDGE HIGH SCHOOL | $1,700 |
| SALEM TENNIS AND SWIM CLUB | $1,550 |
| THE ALASKA CLUB | $1,500 |
| SEATTLE TENNIS & EDUCATION FOUNDATION | $1,500 |
| BOEING EMPLOYEE TENNIS CLUB | $1,500 |
| GREATER PORTLAND TENNIS COUNCIL | $1,430 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON | $1,400 |
| CENTRAL COAST TENNIS ASSOCIATION | $1,350 |
| THE VALLEY ATHLETIC CLUB | $1,250 |
| READY SET TENNIS | $1,150 |
| PORTLAND TENNIS CENTER | $1,150 |
| KIDS N' TENNIS INC | $1,150 |
| KALAMA RACQUET ASSOCIATION LLP | $1,150 |
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, $375) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 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 +33% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
52 repeat relationships — 37 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k 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
- TOTENNIS OUTREACH PROGRAMS OF PUGET SOUND5× · 2021–2025 · $35k · revenue +95%
PORTLAND TENNIS & EDUCATION5× · 2021–2025 · $33k · revenue +45%- FTFAIRBANKS TENNIS ASSOCIATION4× · 2021–2025 · $29k · revenue +36%
Funded once
- ICIRVINGTON CLUBone grant, 2021 · $14k · revenue +14%
- SLSERVING LOVE FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2022 · $12k · 42% of their budget
- MHMEAD HIGH SCHOOLone grant, 2021 · $11k
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.
Our mission is to promote the love of tennis among all ages and backgrounds with a special focus on nurturing young athletes to become lifelong tennis players with skills in dedication, discipline, and resilience.
The Portland Table Tennis Club accommodates all-levels of play providing training and competition in a welcoming respectful and supportive environment. We help athletes of all ages achieve their highest potential and become life-long table…
To promote the growth of tennis through engaging children, adults, and families in every neighborhood.
Our Mission is to promote health, engage in cultural activities, and encourage recreational activities for adults and children
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Seattle Tennis Club and the most unlike its peers is Centennial High School Booster. 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 27 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 12% of your grantees by number, and just 11% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
29 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. 29 of the 96 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 GREATER PORTLAND TENNIS COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE TENNIS & EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds TENNIS OUTREACH PROGRAMS OF PUGET SOUND ↗
- Who funds PORTLAND TENNIS & EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds FAIRBANKS TENNIS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds TIMBERHILL RACQUET CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds IRVINGTON CLUB ↗
- Who funds YAKIMA TENNIS CLUB ↗
- Who funds SERVING LOVE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CENTENNIAL HIGH SCHOOL BOOSTER ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY AND ALUMNI ↗
- Who funds BEND GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB ↗
- Who funds KIDS N' TENNIS ↗
- Who funds Sports in Schools ↗
- Who funds Spokane Racquet Club Inc ↗
- Who funds Willow Area Community Organization 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: GenYOUTH Incorporated · Round It Up America Inc · For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST) · School's Out Washington · Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Washington · Northwest Harvest Emm · Page Ahead Childrens Literacy Prgm · Invested · Washington First Robotics · Oea Choice Trust · Schoolhouse Supplies Inc · Good Sports Inc
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-Pacific Northwest Section 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.