How much did USTA PLAYER DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 51% of USTA PLAYER DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

youthtopsmid-atlanticgrowing inspireinspire healthierhealthier everywhereunder

2019

wheelchair

2020

—

2021

—

2022

involvement

2023

—

2024

wheelchairallied partner

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k2 grants · $15k
$10k–50k5 grants · $65k

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

$409k

Total assets

Largest grants

THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY$24,910
UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM$10,000
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY$10,000
UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON SYSTEM$10,000
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA FOUNDATION$10,000
AUBURN UNIVERSITY$7,500
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$7,500

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–17, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

55%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$439k · 12 repeat orgs$364k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$439k

$329k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%

+43%

Still filing today

83%

60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 56% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Recreation & SportsEducationHuman ServicesHealthOther

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

JT
Junior Tennis Champions Center Inc
3× · 2017–2019 · $142k · revenue +23%
TG
THE GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
3× · 2022–2024 · $114k · revenue +11%
US
UstaMidwest Section
2× · 2017–2018 · $24k · revenue +18%

Funded once

SL
SK57 LLC
one grant, 2021 · $110k
NH
Northwest High Performance
one grant, 2017 · $20k
IA
Img Academy Llc
one grant, 2017 · $20k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

United States Professional Tennis Association

The uspta, inc.'s purpose is to raise the standards of tennnis teaching as a profession and to increase the interest and awareness of tennis to the general public.

—

United States Table Tennis Association

The mission of usatt is to support, grow and inspire the table tennis community, and to provide resources that enable athletes to achieve sustained competitive excellence and pursue olympic and paralympic success.

—

Intercollegiate Tennis Coaches

Administrative, supervision, and sponsorship of college tennis tournaments, college rankings, coaches education, and convention as college tennis rules and regulations.

Recreation & Sports

United States Tennis Association Inc

To innovate promote and grow the game of tennis

—

United States Racquetball

Usa racquetball, recognized by the united states olympic committee as the national governing body for the sport, is committed to our members and the growth of racquetball from recreational play to international competition.

Recreation & Sports

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.

—

Tennis Officials of San Antonio Association

Recreation & Sports

United States Tennis Association Incorporated

Our mission is growing tennis to inspire healthier people and communities everywhere.

—

Tennessee Tennis Association

To grow and develop the sport of tennis in tennessee.

—

South Carolina Tennis

To develop, maintain, and promote the game of tennis.

—

United States Squash Racquets

United states squash racquets association, inc. ("us squash") is the governing body of the game of squash racquets in the united states. its mission is to lead squash's growth and development by increasing access and awareness, supporting…

Recreation & Sports

Georgia Tennis Association Inc

The georgia tennis association has the following exempt purposes and objectives:1. to create, develop, maintain, and promote the game of tennis within georgia.2. to cooperate with affiliated state and divisional associations in developing…

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United States Tennis Association- and the most unlike its peers is Mayo Clinic. 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 48 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/36

the rest of the field

11%

206,164/1,819,529

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.

05the grantee network

23 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

23/23

Grantees still filing

23/23

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$412,703Recreation & Sports$220,600Education$142,311Health$20,000Human Services$8,000

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.

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.

United States Tennis Association IncorporatedNY36.8× affinity15 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United States Tennis Association Incorporated · National Collegiate Athletic Association · The Dallas 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 organisation USTA PLAYER DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

2get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Junior Tennis Champions Center Inc.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~7 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 6 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

6 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 522114223 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on Junior Tennis Champions Center Inc, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 7 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2023; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 1% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Usta Player Development Incorporated?

Find your warmest path to Usta Player Development Incorporated through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

USTA PLAYER DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

23 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Usta Player Development Incorporated?

More from the funding graph

USTA PLAYER DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

23 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Usta Player Development Incorporated?

More from the funding graph