Skip to content
Nicole Laurel Cuddy Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Nicole Laurel Cuddy Foundation

Its FY2022 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$39k
Granted FY2022
7
Grants FY2022
5
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2022.

Public Benefit$72kHuman Services$14kHealth$14kEducation$13kArts & Culture$12kReligion$10kPhilanthropy$5kCommunity Improvement$5kOther$0
02FY2022 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k5 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
$1,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$172k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION$20,000
JUDICIAL WATCH$10,000
FLCCC ALLIANCE$5,000
ALASKA POLICY FORUM$1,000
PROJECT VERITAS$1,000
PRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$1,000
ARMED SERVICES YMCA OF ALASKA$1,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY21–21, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, 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%AMERICAN RED CROSS OF ALASKA: $1k → 10%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

AK
WA
MI
OR
CA
CO
VA
KS
DC
TX
FL
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.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$97k · 6 repeat orgs$46k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +62% since the first grant, against +27% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2022, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
11

Total granted

$97k
$39k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
+27%

Still filing today

67%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
Public BenefitHealthEducationFood & NutritionReligionYouth 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

  • TP
    TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION
    3× · 2020–2022 · $50k · revenue +62%
  • JUDICIAL WATCH INC
    4× · 2019–2022 · $21k · revenue +40%
  • SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN
    3× · 2018–2020 · $9k · revenue +94%

Funded once

  • AC
    ALASKA CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC
    one grant, 2017 · $11k · revenue -3%
  • MR
    MEDIA RESEARCH CENTER OF ALASKA
    one grant, 2019 · $11k
  • LF
    LUCKY FIN PROJECT
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue -35%
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
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
2
Pew Research Center

Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. Pew Research Center generates a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue and…

Social Science
3
Christianity Today International

Christianity Today is a global community inspired by evangelical conviction to advance the stories and ideas of the kingdom of God. Our mission is to elevate the storytellers and sages of the global church.

Religion
4
Foreign Policy Research Institute

The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…

International
5
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
6
The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit
7
American Law Institute

The institute's mission, as set out in its certificate of incorporation, is to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice, and to…

Crime & Legal
8
Dallas International University

As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.

Education
9
American Productivity & Quality Center Inc

See Schedule O. The mission of the American Productivity & Quality Center (APQC) is to educate and broadly share information with people and organizations around the world to improve productivity and quality by:- Discovering, researching…

Community Improvement
10
American Constitution Society for Law & Policy

The american constitution society for law and policy (acs) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, non-partisan legal organization. through a diverse nationwide network of progressive lawyers, law students, judges, scholars, advocates, and many others,…

Education
11
Texas Tribune Inc

The texas tribune promotes civic engagement and public education across the state by producing and sharing for free public data interactives, statewide events and intensive and daily reporting on texas public policy, politics and current…

Education
12
Manhattan Institute for Policy Research Inc

The manhattan institute is a community of scholars, journalists, activists, and civic leaders dedicated to advancing opportunity, individual liberty, and the rule of law in america and its great cities.

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Texas Public Policy Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Texas Organic Research Center Inc. 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

17 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. 17 of the 23 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)
15/17
Grantees still filing
13/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION: $50,300 · Public BenefitTEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATIONJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $21,000 · Public BenefitJUDICIAL WATCH INC+2 more: $700 · Public BenefitMEDIA RESEARCH CENTER OF ALASKA: $11,000 · OtherMEDIA RESEARCH CENTER…FLCCC ALLIANCE: $5,000 · OtherFLCCC ALLIANCEARMED SERVICES YMCA OF ALASKA: $3,000 · OtherARMED SERVICES YMCA O…ANCHORAGE RESCUE MISSION: $2,500 · OtherANCHORAGE RESCUE MISS…WORLDVIEW MATTERS: $2,500 · OtherWORLDVIEW MATTERSNATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK FOUNDATION: $1,000 · OtherPROJECT VERITAS: $1,000 · OtherTexas Organic Research Center Inc: $1,000 · OtherBig Brothers Big Sisters of Alaska: $1,000 · Other+1 more: $100 · OtherALASKA CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $11,000 · HealthALASKA CHILDREN'S S…SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $9,000 · HealthSHRINERS HOSPITALS …LUCKY FIN PROJECT: $5,000 · HealthLUCKY FIN PROJECTALASKA POLICY FORUM INC: $11,500 · EducationALASKA PO…PRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $1,000 · EducationPRAGER UN…+1 more: $200 · EducationMarked Men for Christ Inc: $5,000 · ReligionUNITED WAY OF ANCHORAGE: $5,000 · PhilanthropyAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $1,000 · Human Services
Public Benefit$72,000Other$28,100Health$25,000Education$12,700Religion$5,000Philanthropy$5,000Human Services$1,000

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 budgetTEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION: $50,300 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $21,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetALASKA POLICY FORUM INC: $11,500 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetALASKA CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $11,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $9,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetLUCKY FIN PROJECT: $5,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetMarked Men for Christ Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetUNITED WAY OF ANCHORAGE: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWORLDVIEW MATTERS: $2,500 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTexas Organic Research Center Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetBig Brothers Big Sisters of Alaska: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLeadership Institute: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHILLSDALE COLLEGE: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCATO INSTITUTE: $200 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 Alaska Community …Rasmuson FoundationDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Alaska Community FoundationAK15.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Alaska Community Foundation · Rasmuson Foundation · 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 Nicole Laurel Cuddy Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Nicole Laurel Cuddy 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Shriners Hospitals for Children: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get 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 · 0–25%
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 Nicole Laurel Cuddy Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Nicole Laurel Cuddy 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 23 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Nicole Laurel Cuddy’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