Skip to content

· Private foundation

Cyrus M Quigley Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$47k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it funds
0176% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Youth Development$78kHousing & Shelter$53kRecreation & Sports$33kEducation$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $37k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$6,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$910k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$10,000
TREKKERS$8,000
LEAP$7,500
CASPER BOXING CLUB$6,000
WILD HEARTS IDAHO$5,000
WHEEL FUN (VERDE VALLEY WHEEL FUND)$5,000
TOMORROW'S PROMISE$4,000
A BETTER CHANCE FOR WILTON$1,500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 86% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WHEEL FUN (VERDE VALLEY WHEEL FUND): $5k → 14%TIOBEC: $2k → 16%WILD HEARTS IDAHO: $5k → 8%A BETTER CHANCE FOR WILTON: $8k → 9%LEAP: $17k → 12%CASPER BOXING CLUB: $5k → 11%AVENUE ATHE GRAPEVINE: $10k → 7%TREKKERS: $3k → 11%WHEEL FUN (VERDE VALLEY WHEEL FUND): $5k → 14%WILD HEARTS IDAHO: $3k → 8%A BETTER CHANCE FOR WILTON: $7k → 9%LEAP: $15k → 12%CASPER BOXING CLUB: $5k → 11%AVENUE ATHE GRAPEVINE: $8k → 7%TREKKERS: $3k → 11%WILD HEARTS IDAHO: $3k → 8%A BETTER CHANCE FOR WILTON: $7k → 9%LEAP: $15k → 12%CASPER BOXING CLUB: $1k → 11%A BETTER CHANCE FOR WILTON: $7k → 9%LEAP: $10k → 12%A BETTER CHANCE FOR WILTON: $7k → 9%LEAP: $10k → 12%A BETTER CHANCE FOR WILTON: $5k → 9%LEAP: $10k → 12%A BETTER CHANCE FOR WILTON: $4k → 9%LEAP: $8k → 12%A BETTER CHANCE FOR WILTON: $4k → 9%LEAP: $8k → 12%A BETTER CHANCE FOR WILTON: $2k → 9%LEAP: $8k → 12%SOLAR YOUTH: $2k → 12%SOLAR YOUTH: $1k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

ME
NH
ID
MA
WY
CT
AZ
TX
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$278k · 8 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +44% since the first grant, against -72% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
2

Total granted

$278k
$6k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+44%
-72%

Still filing today

75%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationRecreation & SportsYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • TI
    TREKKERS INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $54k · revenue +55%
  • AB
    A BETTER CHANCE OF WILTON INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $49k · revenue +11%
  • CB
    CASPER BOXING CLUB
    7× · 2018–2025 · $33k · revenue +24%

Funded once

  • MH
    MIMIS HOUSE
    one grant, 2021 · $4k · revenue -72%
  • T
    TIOBEC
    one grant, 2017 · $2k
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
Cloud Nine Outdoors

Youth mentorship

Civil Rights
2
Team Wilderness Inc

Our mission is to provide youth from urban areas with transformative outdoor experiences that cultivate a deep connection with nature while promoting personal and academic growth and overall well-being. To grow teamwork, leadership, and…

Youth Development
3
906 Adventure Team

To inspire youth to experience outdoor adventures through mountain biking and trails, with a focus on building self-esteem and strong minds, active healthy lifestyles, and trail stewardship.

Youth Development
4
Boston Explorers Inc

Youth Development

Recreation & Sports
5
Teen Excellence
Community Improvement
6
Big Sky Youth Empowerment Project Inc

Big sky youth empowerment creates a transformative community where vulnerable teenagers experience belonging, purpose, and well-being through group mentorship, adventure, and connection with the natural world. our vision is that byep teens…

Youth Development
7
Friends of Explorer Post 58

Youth Outdoor Education

Youth Development
8
Austin Explore Inc

Explore austin empowers youth to reach their full potential through mentoring, leadership, and outdoor adventure.

Education
9
Apex Youth Connection

Apex is dedicated to enriching the lives of youth through hands-on activities and outdoor adventure, while fostering meaningful mentorships in an environment where every child feels safe and valued.

Youth Development
10
The Trail Youth

The Trail Youth's mission is to remove negative labels for teens ages 13-19 facing difficult challenges in their lives. The Trail Youth provides mentorship, barista training, leadership development and community out reach in North Bend,…

Youth Development
11
Mountains 2 Sea

Our mission is to empower youth using outdoor adventure learning to help them achieve their personal potential. Through outings in the mountains and on the sea, participants will develop a strong foundation for personal health and…

Youth Development
12
Windhorse Equine Learning

By providing experiential and reflective learning opportunities with horses, windhorse equine learning empowers youth to discover and realize their full potential.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Trekkers Inc; the most unlike its peers is Casper Boxing Club. 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

8 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. 8 of the 11 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LEAP: $99,580 · OtherLEAPIndividual grant recipient: $17,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+2 more: $6,000 · OtherTREKKERS INC: $54,000 · Recreation & SportsTREKKERS INCCASPER BOXING CLUB: $33,000 · Recreation & SportsCASPER BOXING CLUBA BETTER CHANCE OF WILTON INC: $49,210 · EducationA BETTER CHANCE OF WIL…TOMORROW'S PROMISE INC: $4,000 · EducationTOMORROW'S PROMISE INCSOLAR YOUTH INC: $3,000 · EducationSOLAR YOUTH INCWild Hearts Idaho Inc: $11,400 · Youth DevelopmentWHEEL FUN: $10,000 · Youth Development
Other$123,080Recreation & Sports$87,000Education$56,210Youth Development$21,400

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTREKKERS INC: $54,000 over 9y, 1.1% of budgetA BETTER CHANCE OF WILTON INC: $49,210 over 9y, 4.9% of budgetCASPER BOXING CLUB: $33,000 over 7y, 3.3% of budgetWild Hearts Idaho Inc: $11,400 over 3y, 3.6% of budgetWHEEL FUN: $10,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetMIMIS HOUSE: $4,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetSOLAR YOUTH INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.3% 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.

  • Who funds TREKKERS INC ↗
  • Who funds A BETTER CHANCE OF WILTON INC ↗
  • Who funds CASPER BOXING CLUB ↗
  • Who funds Wild Hearts Idaho Inc ↗
  • Who funds WHEEL FUN ↗
  • Who funds TOMORROW'S PROMISE INC ↗
  • Who funds MIMIS HOUSE ↗
  • Who funds SOLAR YOUTH INC ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity8 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Cyrus M Quigley Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Cyrus M Quigley Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 16%
  • Solar Youth Inc: 16% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Cyrus M Quigley Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Cyrus M Quigley 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 11 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 Cyrus M Quigley’s filings →

More from the funding graph