Skip to content
The Cygnet Foundation at a glance

· 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 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 2025.

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

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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
CALIFORNIA TROUT$2,000
LA COMPOST$2,000
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS$2,000
CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY$2,000
XERCES SOCIETY$1,000
ARROYOS FOOTHILLS CONSERVANCY$1,000
CLOCKSHOP$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its 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%THE STORY OF STUFF PROJECT: $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%CATALOGUE CHOICE: $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
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.

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

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +74% since the first grant, against -38% for those 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

+74%
-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
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

  • 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%
  • AS
    ARROYO SECO FOUNDATION HAHAMONGNA NATIVE PLANT NURSERY
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue -38%
  • AC
    AUDUBON CENTER AT DEBS PARK
    one grant, 2023 · $1k
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
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sustainable Conservation; 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.
04the grantee network

21 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. 21 of the 26 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)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
14/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and 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…Active San Gabriel Valley: $52,000 · Community ImprovementALGALITA MARINE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION: $52,000 · Science & TechCLOCKSHOP: $22,000 · Arts & Culture
Environment$420,000Other$190,000Education$98,000Recreation & Sports$85,000Community Improvement$52,000Science & Tech$52,000Arts & Culture$22,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's 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 budgetActive San Gabriel Valley: $52,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetALGALITA MARINE RESEARCH AND EDUCATION: $52,000 over 3y, 10% 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 budgetWetlands and Wildlife Care Center: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCalifornia YIMBY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOLSA CHICA CONSERVANCY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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

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 The Cygnet Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Cygnet Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's 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
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 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 26 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 Cygnet’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