Skip to content

· Private foundation

Cnyl Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$122k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$62k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

51% of Cnyl Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to The Board Of Trustees Of The Leland Stanford Junior University, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 2 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

3
’17
1
’18
2
’19
2
’20
2
’21
2
’22
2
’23
2
’24
2
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Education$731kPublic Benefit$5k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $117k
$55,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$3.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
STANFORD UNIVERSITY$62,000
NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION$55,000
SGLJ FOUNDATIONSOUTH HILLS ACADEMY FOUNDATION$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 4% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%STANFORD UNIVERSITY: $62k → 8%SGLJ FOUNDATIONSOUTH HILLS ACADEMY FOUNDATION: $5k → 14%INTERNATIONAL LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION: $5k → 14%CODEORG: $26k → 9%NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $60k → 7%STANFORD UNIVERSITY: $62k → 8%SOUTH HILL ACADEMY FOUNDATION: $4k → 14%NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $55k → 7%STANFORD UNIVERSITY: $60k → 8%SOUTH HILLS ACADEMY FOUNDATION: $4k → 14%NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $45k → 7%STANFORD UNIVERSITY: $60k → 8%SOUTH HILLS ACADEMY FOUNDATION: $4k → 14%NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $40k → 7%STANFORD UNIVERSITY: $60k → 8%SGLJ FOUNDATIONSOUTH HILLS ACADEMY FOUNDATION: $4k → 14%NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $40k → 7%STANFORD UNIVERSITY: $55k → 8%SOUTH HILL ACADEMY FOUNDATION: $4k → 14%NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $40k → 7%STANFORD UNIVERSITY: $45k → 8%SOUTH HILL ACADEMY FOUNDATION: $3k → 14%NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $35k → 7%STANFORD UNIVERSITY: $20k → 8%NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $20k → 7%STANFORD UNIVERSITY: $20k → 8%NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $20k → 7%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 54% of Cnyl Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 55% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 53%.

Cnyl Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its field
05the grantee network

5 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/5
Grantees still filing
4/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $444,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITYNATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $355,000 · EducationNATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION+2 more: $54,000 · Education+2 moreINTERNATIONAL LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Public Benefit
Education$853,000Public Benefit$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $444,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $355,000 over 9y, 2.7% of budgetSGLJ FOUNDATION: $28,000 over 7y, 100% of budgetCODEORG: $26,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Cnyl Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Cnyl Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Cnyl Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Cnyl Foundation 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.

    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 5 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Cnyl’s filings →

    More from the funding graph