Skip to content

· Private foundation

Sydney & Phyllis Wragge Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$541k
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$105k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Environment$199kHealth$120kPhilanthropy$71kCivil Rights$58kRecreation & Sports$47kCrime & Legal$29kEducation$21kFood & Nutrition$20kOther$0
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k11 grants · $267k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $274k
$29,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CEDARS SINAI MEDICAL CENTER$105,000
CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION$103,500
CHARLES RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION$65,947
LAGUNA CANYON FUND$42,000
CENTER FOR REPODUCTIVE RIGHTS$40,000
CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY$37,000
INNOCENCE PROJECT INC$29,000
Individual grant recipient$25,000
PRINCETON PUBLIC LIBRARY$20,000
TRENTON AREA SOUP KITCHEN$20,000
BULLMASTIFF RESCUERS$15,000
THE 124 CLUB$15,000
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR METROWEST$14,000
WHYY RADIO$10,000
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 (FY24–24, $29k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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%INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $29k → 17%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

NH
NY
MA
PA
NJ
CA
VA
DC
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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$413k · 9 repeat orgs$189k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
1

Total granted

$413k
$5k

Still filing today

44%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $184k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentRecreation & SportsHealthHuman ServicesFood & NutritionAnimalsOther
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

  • CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $114k · revenue +4%
  • CHARLES RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $69k · revenue +41%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR REPODUCTIVE RIGHTS
    4× · 2021–2024 · $58k

Funded once

  • 1C
    124 CLUB PRINCETON
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
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
New Jersey Conservation Foundation

Recognizing that a healthy environment is critical to the well-being and survival of all living things, new jersey conservation foundation is devoted to preserving land and protecting natural resources throughout new jersey's (continued on…

Environment
2
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
3
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
4
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
5
Climate Conservation Dba Center for Large Landscape Conservation

We bring science, policy, and proven solutions directly to communities working to restore the integrity and natural connectivity of the landscapes in which they live. (see schedule o)

Environment
6
Clean Ocean Action Inc

Clean ocean action's goal is to improve and protect the waters off the new jersey/new york coast from pollution, plastics, industrialization and climate change with research, education and citizen action.

Environment
7
League to Save Lake Tahoe

Mission statement: the league to save lake tahoe protects and restores the environmental health, sustainability, and scenic beauty of the lake tahoe basin. we focus on water quality and its clarity for the preservation of a pristine lake…

Religion
8
Ocean Conservancy

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

Environment
9
Coastal Bend Bays & Estuaries Program Inc

Coastal bend bays & estuaries program is dedicated to protecting and restoring bays and estuaries of the texas coastal bend. coastal bend bays and estuaries remain a vital part of the environmental and economic landscape by preserving and…

Environment
10
Chagrin River Watershed Partners Inc

Preserving and enhancing the scenic and environmental quality of the ecosystem of the chagrin river, lake erie and other ohio watersheds in a manner which assures a sustainable future for people, plants and animals.

Human Services
11
American Littoral Society

Promote the study and conservation of marine life and its habitat, defend the coast from harm, and empower others to do the same.

Environment
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Nature Conservancy; the most unlike its peers is The 124 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

11 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. 11 of the 17 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CENTER FOR REPODUCTIVE RIGHTS: $57,500 · OtherCENTER FOR REPODUCTIVE RIGHTSLAGUNA CANYON FUND: $57,000 · OtherLAGUNA CANYON FUNDIndividual grant recipient: $27,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientPRINCETON PUBLIC LIBRARY: $21,000 · OtherPRINCETON PUBLIC LIBRARYThe 124 Club: $15,000 · OtherThe 124 ClubWHYY RADIO: $14,500 · OtherWHYY RADIOTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $10,500 · Other+1 more: $5,000 · OtherCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC: $114,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INCCHARLES RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC: $68,947 · EnvironmentCHARLES RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATIO…+1 more: $6,000 · EnvironmentCEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $105,000 · HealthCEDARS-SINAI MEDIC…CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY: $47,000 · Recreation & SportsTHE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $29,000 · Human ServicesTASK Inc Trenton Area Soup Kitchen Inc: $20,000 · Food & NutritionBULLMASTIFF RESCUERS INC: $15,000 · AnimalsCommunity Foundation for MetroWest Inc: $14,000 · Philanthropy
Other$207,500Environment$188,947Health$105,000Recreation & Sports$47,000Human Services$29,000Food & Nutrition$20,000Animals$15,000Philanthropy$14,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC: $114,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $105,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHARLES RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC: $68,947 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetCRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY: $47,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTHE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $29,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTASK Inc Trenton Area Soup Kitchen Inc: $20,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBULLMASTIFF RESCUERS INC: $15,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetThe 124 Club: $15,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetCommunity Foundation for MetroWest Inc: $14,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $10,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $6,000 over 2y, 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 8%
  • Charles River Watershed Association Inc: 8% of income from government
  • Community Foundation for MetroWest Inc: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get 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 · 0–40%
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 Sydney & Phyllis Wragge Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Sydney & Phyllis Wragge 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 17 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Sydney & Phyllis Wragge’s filings →

More from the funding graph