Skip to content
Glen and Bobbie Ceiley Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Glen and Bobbie Ceiley 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.

$58k
Granted FY2019
8
Grants FY2019
3
States reached
$26k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

70% of Glen and Bobbie Ceiley Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Chapel & York Foundation Inc, 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. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year Glen and Bobbie Ceiley Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 7 organizations, $58k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

9
’17
6
’18
7
’19
2
’20
1
’21
3
’22
1
’23
2
’24
2
’25

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

01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Animals$724kScience & Tech$70kEnvironment$61kHealth$11kInternational$3kArts & Culture$1kHuman Services$1kEducation$550Other$0
02FY2019 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k5 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $52k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Africa Wildlife Foundation$26,000
The Ark Conservancy$16,000
Children's Cancer Research Fund$10,000
World Wildlife Fund$5,000
Tahoe Forest Health System Foundati$300
University of Denver$250
Newport Beach Police Association$150
Humane Society International$150
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–25, $11k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SHOES THAT FIT: $1k → 14%Spoon Foundation: $200 → 12%THE AMERICAN RED CROSS: $10k → 14%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.
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.
$860k · 12 repeat orgs$29k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +57% since the first grant, against +5% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2019, 6 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
3

Total granted

$860k
$2k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%
+5%

Still filing today

83%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
AnimalsEnvironmentHuman ServicesScience & TechEducationReligionOther
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

  • HW
    Humane World for Animals International
    4× · 2018–2024 · $606k · revenue +95%
  • SRI INTERNATIONAL
    2× · 2020–2021 · $70k · revenue +19%
  • LD
    LIVING DESERT THE
    3× · 2023–2025 · $15k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • WI
    WILDAID INC
    one grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue +5%
  • MM
    Matt Meyers Long Ride
    one grant, 2017 · $600
  • SF
    SPOON FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $200 · revenue +0%
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
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
2
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
3
Wildlife Conservation Society

The wildlife conservation society (wcs) saves wildlife and wild places worldwide through science, conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature.

Animals
4
For the Fishes

To address, educate, coordinate, and enhance enforcement capacity to end teh trade in coral reef wildlife for household and other small display aquariums. our supply and demand side strategies are directed locally and globally to…

Animals
5
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
6
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
7
The Peregrine Fund Inc

To change the future for nature and humanity by conserving birds of prey worldwide.

—
8
International Snow Leopard Trust

The international snow leopard trust aims to ethically conserve snow leopards and their high mountain ecosystems through partnerships with indigenous peoples and local communities, and through research to improve the understanding of snow…

Animals
9
Rare

Rare inspires change so people and nature thrive.

Environment
10
International Crane Foundation Inc

The international crane foundation is committed to a world where cranes, people, and our natural heritage thrive together.

Animals
11
World Animal Protection

World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…

Animals
12
The Nature Conservancy

The mission of the nature conservancy is to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Save the Children Federation Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Ark Conservancy. 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

19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 25 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
13/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Humane World for Animals International: $605,844 · AnimalsHumane World for Animals InternationalSAVE THE RHINO INTERNATIONAL INC: $50,000 · AnimalsSAVE THE RHINO INTERNATIONAL INCTHE ARK CONSERVANCY: $42,000 · AnimalsTHE ARK CONSERVANCY+1 more: $1,500 · AnimalsAfrica Wildlife Foundation: $61,323 · OtherAfrica Wi…CHILDREN'S CANCER RESEARCH FUND: $10,000 · OtherCHILDREN'…+9 more: $5,770 · Other+9 moreSRI INTERNATIONAL: $70,000 · Science & TechCHAPEL & YORK US FOUNDATION INC: $35,000 · PhilanthropyLIVING DESERT THE: $15,000 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $12,000 · EnvironmentTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Environment+1 more: $375 · EnvironmentAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $10,000 · Human ServicesSHOES THAT FIT: $1,000 · Human Services+1 more: $200 · Human ServicesSave The Children Federation Inc: $3,000 · International
Animals$699,344Other$77,093Science & Tech$70,000Philanthropy$35,000Environment$28,375Human Services$11,200International$3,000

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 budgetHumane World for Animals International: $605,844 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetSRI INTERNATIONAL: $70,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSAVE THE RHINO INTERNATIONAL INC: $50,000 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetTHE ARK CONSERVANCY: $42,000 over 3y, 99% of budgetLIVING DESERT THE: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $12,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S CANCER RESEARCH FUND: $10,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWILDAID INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHOES THAT FIT: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF DENVER: $550 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLEAGUE TO SAVE LAKE TAHOE: $500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNEWPORT BEACH POLICE FOUNDATION: $370 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTAHOE FOREST HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION: $300 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC7.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Glen and Bobbie Ceiley Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Glen and Bobbie Ceiley Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 Glen and Bobbie Ceiley Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Glen and Bobbie Ceiley 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 25 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Glen and Bobbie Ceiley’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home