Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Cygnet Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$134k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

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

Environment$738kRecreation & Sports$91kEducation$54kArts & Culture$22kFood & Nutrition$7kAnimals$6kHousing & Shelter$1k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $23k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$2,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LAGUNA OCEAN FOUNDATION$100,000
BUILD IT GREEN$13,000
SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION$10,000
CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY$2,000
LA COMPOST$2,000
CALIFORNIA TROUT$2,000
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS$2,000
XERCES SOCIETY$1,000
ARROYOS FOOTHILLS CONSERVANCY$1,000
CLOCKSHOP$1,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%WETLANDS WILDLIFE CARE CENTER: $1k → 10%THE STORY OF STUFF PROJECT: $52k → 10%SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION: $78k → 10%CALIFORNIA YIMBY: $1k → 12%CLIMATE RESOLVE: $19k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $30k → 16%XERCES SOCIETY: $1k → 12%LAGUNA OCEAN FOUNDATION: $100k → 10%THE STORY OF STUFF PROJECT: $2k → 10%SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION: $43k → 10%CLIMATE RESOLVE: $2k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $10k → 16%BOLSA CHICA CONSERVANCY: $1k → 10%THE STORY OF STUFF PROJECT: $1k → 10%SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION: $10k → 10%CLIMATE RESOLVE: $1k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $10k → 16%CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY: $76k → 10%CATALOGUE CHOICE: $1k → 10%SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION: $4k → 10%LA COMPOST: $2k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $2k → 16%CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY: $2k → 10%THE STORY OF STUFF PROJECT: $1k → 10%SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION: $2k → 10%AUDUBON CENTER AT DEBS PARK: $1k → 14%CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY: $2k → 10%THE STORY OF STUFF PROJECT: $1k → 10%SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION: $1k → 10%LA COMPOST: $90k → 14%CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY: $2k → 10%THE STORY OF STUFF PROJECT: $1k → 10%SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION: $1k → 10%LA COMPOST: $4k → 14%CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY: $2k → 10%BUILD IT GREEN: $13k → 10%ENRICH LA: $2k → 14%CALIFORNIA TROUT: $2k → 10%LA COMPOST: $2k → 14%ACTIVESGV: $52k → 14%ALGALITA MARINE RESEARCH AND EDUCAT: $50k → 14%CLOCKSHOP: $17k → 14%CLOCKSHOP: $3k → 14%LA COUNTY BICYCLE COALITION: $3k → 14%LA COUNTY BICYCLE COALITION: $3k → 14%FRIENDS OF THE LOS ANGELES RIVER: $71k → 14%FRIENDS OF THE LOS ANGELES RIVER: $3k → 14%NORTH EAST TREES: $2k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$746k · 15 repeat orgs$173k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +73% since the first grant, against -38% for the ones you funded once.

15 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
8

Total granted

$746k
$59k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%
-38%

Still filing today

87%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 15% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $114k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentAnimalsRecreation & SportsEducationScience & TechHousing & ShelterOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • SC
    Sustainable Conservation
    8× · 2017–2025 · $140k · revenue +104%
  • LC
    LA COMPOST
    4× · 2022–2025 · $98k · revenue +73%
  • CC
    CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY
    6× · 2017–2025 · $85k · revenue +266%

Funded once

  • AS
    Active San Gabriel Valleygraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $52k · revenue +189%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $1k
  • AS
    ARROYO SECO FOUNDATION HAHAMONGNA NATIVE PLANT NURSERY
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue -38%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Santa Clara River Conservancy

The Santa Clara River Conservancy represents the diverse interests of the Santa Clara River, from the flood plain to the highest tributaries, and seeks to secure, sustain, and manage significant lands and waters that provide habitat for…

Environment
2
Ballona Wetlands Conservancy

The preservation and maintenance of environmentally sensitive coastal wetlands.

Environment
3
Nature Collective

Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…

Environment
4
South Bay Clean Creeks Coalition

To reclaim, restore, and revitalize the creeks and rivers in the Santa Clara Valley watershed.

Environment
5
California Association of Resource Conservation Districts

To advane the conservation and orderly development of Land, Water, and other natural resources in California and to create statewide awareness of the urgency for conserving and developing California's natural resources

Environment
6
Save Oceanside Sand

Save Oceanside Sand is a group of local activists dedicated to restoring and preserving the beaches of Oceanside, California. Working with local, regional, state, and federal authorities, our mission is to protect this vital resource by…

Education
7
Council for Watershed Health

Council for watershed health advances the health and sustainability of the region's watersheds, rivers, streams, and habitats - in both natural areas and urban neighborhoods - through science-based research, education, and inclusive…

Environment
8
California Institute for Biodiversity

Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.

Education
9
Planning & Conservation League

The Planning and Conservaton League is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization that serves as the lobbying arm of environmental community -- passing, enforcing, and protecting laws and initiatives that safeguard our environment and communities.

—
10
Rescape California

ReScape addresses climate change by providing a regenerative, nature-based whole systems foundation for landscaping education, workforce development and policy.Foundational to our work is a whole systems watershed framework that…

Environment
11
Environmental Defense Center

The organization protects and enhances the local environment through education, advocacy and legal action.

Crime & Legal
12
California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance

California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sustainable Conservation and the most unlike its peers is Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 22 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number25%0%<5yr16%25%5–10yr20%20%10–20yr18%45%20–35yr10%5%35–55yr12%5%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value25%0%<5yr16%10%5–10yr20%27%10–20yr18%62%20–35yr10%0%35–55yr12%1%55yr+

The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/22
the rest of the field
15%
12,016/81,774

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

04the grantee network

21 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 26 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
14/21
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Sustainable Conservation — $140,000 · EnvironmentSustainable ConservationLAGUNA OCEAN FOUNDATION — $100,000 · EnvironmentLAGUNA OCEAN FOUNDATIONFRIENDS OF THE LOS ANGELES RIVER — $75,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE LOS ANGELES RIVERTHE STORY OF STUFF PROJECT — $58,000 · EnvironmentTHE STORY OF STUFF PROJECTCLIMATE RESOLVE — $22,000 · Environment+6 more — $25,000 · Environment+6 moreARROYOS FOOTHILLS CONSERVANCY — $122,000 · OtherARROYOS FOOTHILLS CONSE…UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA- DAVIS — $52,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNI…+8 more — $16,000 · Other+8 moreLA COMPOST — $98,000 · EducationLA COMPOSTCRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY — $85,000 · Recreation & SportsCRYSTAL CO…ALGALITA MARINE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION — $52,000 · Science & TechActive San Gabriel Valley — $52,000 · Community ImprovementCLOCKSHOP — $22,000 · Arts & Culture
Environment$420,000Other$190,000Education$98,000Recreation & Sports$85,000Science & Tech$52,000Community Improvement$52,000Arts & Culture$22,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetSustainable Conservation — $140,000 over 8y, 1.6% of budgetLAGUNA OCEAN FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetLA COMPOST — $98,000 over 4y, 8.5% of budgetCRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY — $85,000 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE LOS ANGELES RIVER — $75,000 over 3y, 4.7% of budgetTHE STORY OF STUFF PROJECT — $58,000 over 6y, 4.0% of budgetALGALITA MARINE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION — $52,000 over 3y, 10% of budgetActive San Gabriel Valley — $52,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetCLIMATE RESOLVE — $22,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetCLOCKSHOP — $22,000 over 4y, 3.5% of budgetLos Angeles County Bicycle Coalition — $6,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetENRICH LA — $5,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCALIFORNIA TROUT INC — $4,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNorth East Trees Inc — $3,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBLACK THUMB FARM — $2,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetARROYO SECO FOUNDATION HAHAMONGNA NATIVE PLANT NURSERY — $1,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCalifornia YIMBY — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWetlands and Wildlife Care Center — $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBOLSA CHICA CONSERVANCY — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

California Community …Orange County Communi…PatagoniaorgRockefeller Philanthr…Liberty Hill Foundati…The Annenberg Foundat…Sempra FoundationResources Legacy FundWater FoundationDorrance Family Found…Durfee FoundationThe San Francisco Fou…
California Community FoundationCA23.8× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · Orange County Community Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Liberty Hill Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · Sempra Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Water Foundation · Dorrance Family Foundation · Durfee Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization The Cygnet Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Xerces Society Inc — 22% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Cygnet Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Cygnet 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 26 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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