· Private foundation
The Tyler L Rigg Memorial 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.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 43% of THE TYLER L RIGG MEMORIAL FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k14 grants · $58k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $61k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HORIZONS - THE FOOTE SCHOOL | $15,100 |
| DIMENSIONS ED RESEARCH FDN | $15,000 |
| REDSIDE FOUNDATION | $11,000 |
| NATIVE MOVEMENT | $10,000 |
| FLY FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| MICHIGAN BREASTFEEDING NETWORK | $9,000 |
| MULTIPLIER | $8,000 |
| CENTER FOR WHOLE COMMUNITIES | $7,500 |
| NORTHERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY | $6,000 |
| WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL | $5,000 |
| LAWYERS COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS | $5,000 |
| NAMI MAINE | $5,000 |
| DEEP MEDICINE CIRCLE | $4,500 |
| SUPERIOR ARTS YOUTH THEATRE | $3,500 |
| SUN VALLEY YOUTH HOCKEY | $2,500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $64k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 99% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +41% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
27 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- MBMICHIGAN BREASTFEEDING NETWORK6× · 2019–2024 · $60k · revenue +271%
- LTLAND TOGETHER DBA INSIGHT GARDEN PROGRAM5× · 2017–2021 · $58k · revenue +160%
- RFREDSIDE FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2024 · $52k · revenue +221%
Funded once
- KCKLINGBERG COMPREHENSIVE FAMILY SERVICES INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $11k · revenue +58%
- BCBAY CLIFF HEALTH CAMPgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $11k · revenue +65%
- TPTRAILS PROGRAMone grant, 2021 · $10k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…
The vermont network aims to uproot the causes of domestic and sexual violence in vermont and create a world free of oppression where actions, beliefs and systems support all people to thrive. we accomplish this through our key programs…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
As a national leader in environmental health research and advocacy, toxic- free future uses the power of science, education, and activism, to drive strong laws and corporate responsibility that protect the health of all people and the…
Supporting industry transformation towards climate-positive and make green careers transitions and driving the adoption of green workforce development practices broadly.
Gardens for Health International works to provide lasting agricultural solutions to chronic childhood malnutrition
New Roots Institute is a nonprofit empowering the next generation with knowledge and training to end factory farming.
We seek to improve the quality of life for people living with mental health conditions, their families, and their caregivers. we work to ensure that all people impacted by a mental health condition receive the support they need when they…
Nami colorado offers educational programs designed to educate and support family members, friends and individuals affected by mental illness. we aim to develop skills to help people cope with the challenges of mental illness. we advocate…
The Network is a group of 40+ member organizations dedicated to improving the lives of those impacted by gender-based violence through education, public policy and advocacy, and connecting community members with direct service providers.…
To encourage, promote, support, and elect pro-choice women of all political parties to all levels of public office in minnesota.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Klingberg Comprehensive Family Services Inc and the most unlike its peers is Start the Cycle. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
41 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. 41 of the 71 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds MICHIGAN BREASTFEEDING NETWORK ↗
- Who funds LAND TOGETHER DBA INSIGHT GARDEN PROGRAM ↗
- Who funds REDSIDE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FLY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN & FAMILY LIFE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR WHOLE COMMUNITIES INC ↗
- Who funds MARSHALL CHESS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO HAITI PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds NATIVE MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds MULTIPLIER ↗
- Who funds KLINGBERG COMPREHENSIVE FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds BAY CLIFF HEALTH CAMP ↗
- Who funds Deep Medicine Circle ↗
- Who funds NAMI MAINE ↗
- Who funds Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law ↗
- Who funds Peace Development Fund ↗
- Who funds Loveland Youth Gardeners ↗
- Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
- Who funds GROWE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMAZON FRONTLINES ↗
- Who funds AVIELLE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ↗
- Who funds VERMONT ADAPTIVE SKI AND SPORTS ↗
- Who funds National Alliance on Mental Illness of Vermont Inc ↗
- Who funds CARE ABOUT CLIMATE INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Community Foundation Boulder County · Colorado Gives Foundation · Impactassetsinc · The Denver Foundation · Ge Aerospace Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
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 Tyler L Rigg Memorial 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Vermont Adaptive Ski and Sports — 11% of income from government
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.