Skip to content
Asia Wild at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Asia Wild

Asia Wild is committed to rescuing and protecting the welfare of animals worldwide.

$1.7M
Granted FY2023
9
Grants FY2023
7
States reached
$83k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through 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, FY2022 to 2023.

Animals$302kFood & Nutrition$30kEnvironment$5k
02FY2023 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $326,669, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,684,999 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,358,330 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $123k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $193k
$30,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ABRAHAM FOUNDATION - TRUNKS UP$83,215
BORNEO ORANGUTAN SURVIVAL USA$60,000
GLOBAL SANCTUARY FOR ELEPHANT$50,000
TIGERS IN AMERICA (TIGER SANCTUARIES INC)$40,000
VOICE FOR ASIAN ELEPHANTS$30,000
INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION$28,000
KAT USA$25,454
PACIFIC WHALE FOUNDATION$5,000
GLOBAL FEDERATIONS OF ANIMAL SANCTUARIES$5,000
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 (FY22–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 79% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%GLOBAL FEDERATIONS OF ANIMAL SANCTUARIES: $5k → 11%BORNEO ORANGUTAN SURVIVAL USA: $60k → 8%PACIFIC WHALE FOUNDATION: $5k → 9%TIGERS IN AMERICA (TIGER SANCTUARIES INC): $40k → 17%INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $28k → 11%GLOBAL SANCTUARY FOR ELEPHANT: $50k → 14%ABRAHAM FOUNDATION - TRUNKS UP: $83k → 17%Abraham Foundation: $10k → 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.

Grants abroad, by region: $79k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

East Asia and the Pacific$58k · 74% · 4 grants

Stated purpose: Animal Welfare

South Asia$20k · 26% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: Animal Welfare

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its 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
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
2
Sos Rhino
Animals
3
Panthera Corporation

Panthera's mission is the conservation of the world's 40 wild cat species, many of which are endangered or threatened. panthera develops, implements and oversees wild cat conservation strategies on a global scale.

Animals
4
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
5
Wildlife Sos

Protecting india's precious wildlife from poaching, habitat loss, and human exploitation since 1995.

Animals
6
Wildlife Alliance Inc

Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…

Animals
7
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
8
International Primate Protection League

Protecting the world's remaining primates by monitoring and exposing illegal trade, supporting a worldwide network of overseas sanctuaries and ngo's, publicising the plight of abused primates, and operating a sanctuary for resued gibbons.

Animals
9
Mozparks Initiative Inc

Mozparks initiativ, inc has been established to address and defeat the onslaught on elephant, rhino, and other species of wildlife and the habitat of wildlife in mozambique. mozparks partners with non-governmental organizations, local…

—
10
Lao Elephant Initiative

The mission of Lao Elephant Initiative is to promote the wellbeing of Asian elephants through education, community partnership, and innovative conservation strategies. Our projects focus on a range of conservation and environmental…

Human Services
11
Born Free Foundation
—
12
Four Paws International Inc

Our vision is a world where humans treat animals with respect, empathy and understanding. four paws mission is to be the strong, global and independent voice for animals.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Global Sanctuary for Elephants; the most unlike its peers is Tiger Sanctuaries 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

9 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BOS USA: $60,000 · AnimalsBOS USAGLOBAL SANCTUARY FOR ELEPHANTS: $50,000 · AnimalsGLOBAL SANCTUARY FOR ELEPHANTSTIGER SANCTUARIES INC: $40,000 · AnimalsTIGER SANCTUARIES INCVOICE FOR ASIAN ELEPHANTS SOCIETY: $30,000 · AnimalsVOICE FOR ASIAN ELEPHANTS SOCIETYTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $28,000 · AnimalsTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATIONKAT USA: $25,454 · AnimalsKAT USA+1 more: $5,000 · AnimalsThe Abraham Foundation: $93,215 · PhilanthropyThe Abraham FoundationPACIFIC WHALE FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Environment
Animals$238,454Philanthropy$93,215Environment$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetThe Abraham Foundation: $93,215 over 2y, 17% of budgetBOS USA: $60,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetGLOBAL SANCTUARY FOR ELEPHANTS: $50,000 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetTIGER SANCTUARIES INC: $40,000 over 1y, 23% of budgetVOICE FOR ASIAN ELEPHANTS SOCIETY: $30,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $28,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetKAT USA: $25,454 over 1y, 35% of budgetGLOBAL FEDERATION OF ANIMAL SANCTUARIES: $5,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetPACIFIC WHALE FOUNDATION: $5,000 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.

American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE8.5× affinity7 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Asia Wild funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Asia Wild. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s 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 · 0–30%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Asia Wild?

    Find your warmest path to Asia Wild 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 9 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $79k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Asia Wild’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