Skip to content
Chicago Zoological Society at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Chicago Zoological Society

To inspire conservation leadership by connecting people with wildlife and nature.

$252k
Granted FY2026still arriving
4
Grants FY2026still arriving
4
States reached
$53k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$569kAnimals$475kCommunity Improvement$10k
02FY2026 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $112,733, the rows itemized in this filing. The $251,674 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $138,941 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 · FY2026

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $47k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $53k
$46,583
Median grant
4
States reached
$330M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Pangolin Conservation and Research Fdn$53,000
Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois$46,583
Species 360$7,000
American Association of Zoo Veterinarians$6,150
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 (FY17–26) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 73% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%The Biodiversity Group: $7k → 15%Society for Marine Mammal Research Institute: $10k → 8%Conservation Planning Specialist Group-Global Conservation Network: $20k → 6%Species 360: $15k → 11%Vital Ground Foundation: $40k → 9%International Marine Animal Trainers Assoc: $10k → 11%Synchronicity Earth USA: $25k → 17%South Texas Zoological Society: $6k → 16%American Humane Association: $25k → 14%American Association of Zoo Veterinarians: $6k → 14%Pangolin Conservation and Research Fdn: $53k → 5%Zoo & Aquarium Video Archive: $5k → 14%Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois: $47k → 19%Association of Zoos and Aquariums: $25k → 8%Conservation Breeding Specialist Group-Global Conservation Network: $15k → 6%Species 360: $7k → 11%Vital Ground Foundation: $25k → 9%Synchronicity Earth USA: $10k → 17%American Humane Association: $20k → 14%Pangolin Conseravtion and Research Foundation: $17k → 5%Vote Yes for Clean Air Clean Water and Wildlife NFP: $350k → 14%Conservation Planning Specialist Group-Global Conservation Network: $15k → 6%Vital Ground Foundation: $20k → 9%Pangolin Conservation and Research Foundation: $16k → 5%Vote Yes for Clean Air Clean Water and Wildlife NFP: $175k → 14%Amphibian Ark: $6k → 6%Chicago Wilderness-Friends of the Forest Preserves: $9k → 14%Amphibian Ark-Global Conseravtion Network: $6k → 6%Pilsen Neighbors Community Council: $10k → 14%Amphibian Ark-Global Conseravtion Network: $6k → 6%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

MT
MN
IL
NY
MA
OH
CA
MD
AZ
DC
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $62k on the FY2026 return

Schedule F, as filed: 2 regions, $43k to organizations and $19k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$34k · 54% · 3 grants · 2 people

Stated purpose: Conservation Fieldwork

South America$29k · 46% · 1 grant · 1 person

Stated purpose: Conservation Fieldwork

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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 9 repeat orgs$147k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +70% since the first grant, against +31% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2026, 7 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
10

Total granted

$1.0M
$94k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+70%
+31%

Still filing today

89%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $53k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25’26
AnimalsEnvironmentScience & TechPhilanthropyEducationCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • REWILD
    4× · 2017–2020 · $130k · revenue +550%
  • TV
    THE VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $85k · revenue +150%
  • GC
    GLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK
    3× · 2017–2019 · $62k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • AA
    AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +83%
  • PN
    PILSEN NEIGHBORS COMMUNITY COUNCILgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +43%
  • IM
    INTERNATIONAL MARINE ANIMAL TRAINERS ASSOCIATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · 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
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
2
Zoo Outreach Organisation

Wildlife conservation, research and education.

Environment
3
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
4
Wildlife Protection Solutions

To protect endangered species.

Animals
5
Int'l Union for Conservation of Nature & Natural Resources - Us

Iucn-us fund builds bridges between us donors and iucn by catalyzing, accelerating, funding and promoting iucn's work - conserving nature and natural resources in the united states and throughout the world.

Environment
6
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
7
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
8
Zooworld Zoological and Botanical Conservatory Inc

Educate the public about animals and plant habitats, encourage and support preservation of various animal and plant species, including endangered species.

Animals
9
Asia Wild

Asia Wild is committed to rescuing and protecting the welfare of animals worldwide. They support small, locally-focused organizations that tirelessly combat numerous issues that threaten wildlife survival, including poaching, abuse,…

Animals
10
International Conservation Coalition Inc

None

Animals
11
American Association of Zoo Keepers

The american association of zoo keepers exists to advance excellence in the animal keeping profession, foster effective communication beneficial to animal care, support deserving conservation projects, and promote the preservation of our…

Public Benefit
12
Denver Zoological Foundation

Inspiring communities to save wildlife for future generations.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is SPECIES360; the most unlike its peers is Pilsen Neighbors Community Council. 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

20 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. 20 of the 21 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/20
Grantees still filing
18/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VOTE YES FOR CLEAN AIR CLEAN WATER: $525,000 · OtherVOTE YES FOR CLEAN AIR CLEAN WATERTHE VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION INC: $85,000 · OtherTHE VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION INCTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: $46,583 · OtherTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS+2 more: $32,000 · OtherREWILD: $130,000 · AnimalsREWILDPangolin Conservation and Research Foundation Ohio: $85,500 · AnimalsPangolin Conservation and Research Fou…GLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK: $62,000 · AnimalsGLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORKAMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION: $45,000 · AnimalsAMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATIONINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION: $30,000 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATIONAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC: $25,000 · AnimalsAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PAR…+3 more: $17,276 · AnimalsSYNCHRONICITY EARTH USA INC: $35,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE FOREST PRESERVES: $8,500 · EnvironmentSOCIETY FOR MARINE MAMMALOGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $10,000 · Science & TechTHE BIODIVERSITY GROUP: $6,500 · Science & TechPILSEN NEIGHBORS COMMUNITY COUNCIL: $10,000 · Community ImprovementFLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $7,000 · EducationAMPHIBIAN ARK: $6,000 · Philanthropy
Other$688,583Animals$394,776Environment$43,500Science & Tech$16,500Community Improvement$10,000Education$7,000Philanthropy$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetVOTE YES FOR CLEAN AIR CLEAN WATER: $525,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetREWILD: $130,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetPangolin Conservation and Research Foundation Ohio: $85,500 over 3y, 26% of budgetTHE VITAL GROUND FOUNDATION INC: $85,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetGLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK: $62,000 over 3y, 3.5% of budgetAMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION: $45,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSYNCHRONICITY EARTH USA INC: $35,000 over 2y, 9.2% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSPECIES360: $22,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetPILSEN NEIGHBORS COMMUNITY COUNCIL: $10,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetINTERNATIONAL MARINE ANIMAL TRAINERS ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetSOCIETY FOR MARINE MAMMALOGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $10,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetFLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMPHIBIAN ARK: $6,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetSOUTH TEXAS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $5,796 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetZOO & AQUARIUM VIDEO ARCHIVE: $5,330 over 1y, 7.1% 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.

Columbus Zoological P…Zoological Society of…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Columbus Zoological Park AssociationOH13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Columbus Zoological Park Association · Zoological Society of San Diego · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Chicago Zoological Society funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chicago Zoological Society. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    4report 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.

    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 21 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Chicago Zoological Society’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