Skip to content
Atlanta Fulton County Zoo Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Atlanta Fulton County Zoo Inc

Zoo atlanta's mission is to save wildlife and their habitats through research, conservation, education and engaging experiences.

$263k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$55k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Philanthropy$231kAnimals$197kEnvironment$34k
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $156,140, the rows itemized in this filing. The $263,125 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $106,985 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $76k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $55k
$10,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$126M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHARITIES AID FOUNDATIONS - FRIENDS OF TUSK$55,000
TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE$15,000
CLEVELAND METROPARKS ZOO$11,151
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC$10,000
WILDLIFE ALLIANCE$10,000
INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION$10,000
BORNEO ORANGUTAN SURVIVAL USA$10,000
MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION$10,000
PEREGRINE FUND$9,000
RED PANDA NETWORK$8,489
ORANGUTAN OUTREACH LANDSLIDE RELIEF$7,500
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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 39% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%PEREGRINE FUND: $13k → 8%MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $10k → 6%BORNEO ORANGUTAN SURVIVAL USA: $10k → 8%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $10k → 10%ORANGUTAN OUTREACH: $8k → 11%WILDLIFE ALLIANCE: $10k → 17%INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $10k → 11%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $6k → 12%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $7k → 13%SEDGWICK COUNTY ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $6k → 16%PAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE: $10k → 8%THE XERCES SOCIETY: $6k → 12%NORTH CAROLINA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $10k → 14%SAVE THE GIANTS: $6k → 14%INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS INC AKA THE WILDS: $6k → 15%CLEVELAND METROPARKS ZOO: $11k → 17%LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $10k → 14%CHARITIES AID FOUNDATIONS - FRIENDS OF TUSK: $60k → 9%ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GROUP: $6k → 8%PEREGRINE FUND: $9k → 8%MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $7k → 6%RED PANDA NETWORK: $12k → 10%WILDLIFE ALLIANCE: $10k → 17%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $15k → 12%PAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE: $10k → 8%NORTH CAROLINA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $7k → 14%CLEVELAND METROPARKS ZOO: $6k → 17%LINCOLN PARK ZOO: $10k → 14%CHARITIES AID FOUNDATIONS - FRIENDS OF TUSK: $55k → 9%RED PANDA NETWORK: $10k → 10%WILDLIFE ALLIANCE: $10k → 17%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $10k → 12%CLEVELAND METROPARKS ZOO: $5k → 17%LINCOLN PARK ZOO: $10k → 14%CHARITIES AID FOUNDATIONS - FRIENDS OF TUSK: $51k → 9%WILDLIFE ALLIANCE: $7k → 17%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $10k → 12%CHARITIES AID FOUNDATIONS - FRIENDS OF TUSK: $50k → 9%CHARITIES AID FOUNDATIONS - FRIENDS OF TUSK: $50k → 9%CHARITIES AID FOUNDATIONS - FRIENDS OF TUSK: $20k → 9%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

ID
MN
IL
NY
OR
OH
CA
VA
MD
KS
NC
SC
GA
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $92k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South America$92k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: TO HELP WITH GOLDEN LION TAMARINS

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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 53% of Atlanta Fulton County Zoo Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Atlanta Fulton County Zoo Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 3.7% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$253k · 10 repeat orgs$79k to everyone else

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
8

Total granted

$253k
$49k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+17%
+23%

Still filing today

100%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
AnimalsInternationalOther
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

  • TT
    THE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION
    4× · 2020–2025 · $41k · revenue +886%
  • WA
    WILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC
    4× · 2020–2025 · $37k · revenue +12%
  • RP
    RED PANDA NETWORK
    3× · 2023–2025 · $31k · revenue +17%

Funded once

  • GC
    GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA
    one grant, 2020 · $7k · revenue +2%
  • RT
    RAINFOREST TRUSTgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $7k · revenue +78%
  • SC
    SEDGWICK COUNTY ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC
    one grant, 2023 · $6k · revenue +25%
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
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
2
Zoo Outreach Organisation

Wildlife conservation, research and education.

Environment
3
Zambia Carnivore Programme

To safeguard large carnivores, their prey, and habitat in zambia through applied research, conservation, and education.

Animals
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
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
6
Conservation Society of California

Through management of oakland zoo, the conservation society of california deepens connection with animals, saves wildlife, and inspires champions for the natural world.

Animals
7
Wildlife Sos

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

Animals
8
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
9
African Wildlife Foundation Inc

Awf's mission is to ensure wildlife and wild lands thrive in modern africa. we work to equip african governments, institutions, business, and communities with the tools, insights, and support they need to define, own, and realize a…

Animals
10
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
11
Wild Earth Allies Inc

Our mission is to protect vital areas of our planet for wildlife and people through local conservation action. Our vision is a world where wildlife and people flourish in healthy ecosystems that sustain us all.

Environment
12
International Crane Foundation Inc

The international crane foundation is committed to a world where cranes, people, and our natural heritage thrive together.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Carolina Zoological Society Inc; the most unlike its peers is Red Panda Network. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

21 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 22 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)
3
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

CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $286,182 · PhilanthropyCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICATHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $41,000 · AnimalsTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATIONWILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC: $37,240 · AnimalsWILDLIFE ALLIANCE INCRED PANDA NETWORK: $30,774 · AnimalsRED PANDA NETWORKLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $30,000 · AnimalsLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYCLEVELAND ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $22,909 · AnimalsCLEVELAND ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYPAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INC: $20,000 · AnimalsPAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INCNORTH CAROLINA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $17,000 · AnimalsNORTH CAROLINA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INCMINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $17,000 · AnimalsMINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATIONORANGUTAN OUTREACH INC ATTN RICHARD ZIMMERMAN: $15,000 · AnimalsWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $10,000 · AnimalsTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $10,000 · AnimalsBOS USA: $10,000 · Animals+4 more: $23,298 · Animals+4 moreTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC: $22,000 · OtherZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GROUP INC: $6,000 · OtherSAVE THE GIANTS: $6,000 · OtherGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $7,000 · InternationalRAINFOREST TRUST: $7,000 · International
Philanthropy$286,182Animals$284,221Other$34,000International$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 budgetCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $286,182 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $41,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetWILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC: $37,240 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetRED PANDA NETWORK: $30,774 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $30,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCLEVELAND ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $22,909 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC: $22,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $17,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $17,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetORANGUTAN OUTREACH INC ATTN RICHARD ZIMMERMAN: $15,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $7,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetRAINFOREST TRUST: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEDGWICK COUNTY ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $6,298 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GROUP INC: $6,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetXERCES SOCIETY INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPANDRILLUS FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 3.0% 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.

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.

Fort Wayne Zoological…Jacksonville Zoologic…Detroit Zoological So…Zoological Society of…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fort Wayne Zoological Society IncIN13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fort Wayne Zoological Society Inc · Jacksonville Zoological Society Inc · Detroit Zoological Society · Zoological Society of San Diego · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Atlanta Fulton County Zoo Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Atlanta Fulton County Zoo Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Pan African Sanctuary Alliance Inc: 68% of income from government
  • Xerces Society Inc: 22% of income from government
  • Giraffe Conservation Foundation Usa: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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.

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 22 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Atlanta Fulton County Zoo’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