How much did COLUMBUS ZOOLOGICAL PARK ASSOCIATION grant in FY2024?

Animals$8.3MEnvironment$295kEducation$109kInternational$65kPhilanthropy$40kArts & Culture$27kRecreation & Sports$21kScience & Tech$15kSocial Science$6kOther$599k

02FY2024 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k1 grant · $5k
$10k–50k16 grants · $270k
$50k–250k4 grants · $587k

$10,010

Median grant

States reached

$314M

Total assets

Largest grants

INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS INC$218,100
TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE$152,465
MGVP INC$110,869
CLEARWATER MARINE AQUARIUM RESEARCH$106,000
REWILD$45,000
MONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION$30,000
FRIENDS OF BONOBOS$25,000
DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL$25,000
INTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION$25,000
SAVE THE MANATEE CLUB INC$20,000
WIDECAST$10,010
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY$10,000
WILD NATURE INSTITUTE$10,000
INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION$10,000
OHIO WILDLIFE CENTER$10,000

02The need

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 10%. 89% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$9.1M · 33 repeat orgs$374k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +55% since the first grant, against +50% for the ones you funded once.

33 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$9.1M

$359k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%

+50%

Still filing today

97%

92%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

AnimalsEnvironmentEducationPhilanthropyArts & CultureScience & TechOther

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

TW
THE WILDS
8× · 2017–2024 · $4.6M · revenue +34%
REWILD
2× · 2023–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +236%
MI
MGVP INC
8× · 2017–2024 · $630k · revenue +8%

Funded once

RF
RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR THE CITY
one grant, 2023 · $74k · revenue +7%
AA
AFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUNDgraduated
one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +525%
AO
ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS & AQUARIUMSgraduated
one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +83%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

International Wildlife

The international wildlife refuge foundation was created in 2005 to help foster conservation, increase refuge visibility, encourage support, and enhance quality of life. it is an alliance of organizations and individuals that builds the…

Environment

Women for Conservation

Protect endangered wildlife and their habitats

Environment

Global Wildlife Trust Inc

Global wildlife trust is dedicated to broadening human understanding of the animal world through immersion in naturalistic recreations and educational programs using live animals both on site and in the community.

Animals

Wilderness Conservation Foundation

Environment

Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute

—

Marine Conservation Science Institute

Philanthropy

Society for Conservation Biology

To advance the science and practice of conserving earth's biological diversity.

Environment

Commonwealth Zoological Corporation

To provide all administrative and other services and support required or contemplated by chapter 92b of the massachusetts general laws to the franklin park zoo and the walter d. stone memorial zoo, to any other agency or entity referenced…

Animals

International Primate Protection

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

Chicago Zoological Society

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

Animals

Global Animal Partnership

Animals

World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf has worked since 1961 to protect the future of nature. wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. the wwf network, of which wwf-us is part, is one of the world's leading…

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is African Wildlife Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Washington University. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/59

the rest of the field

6,875/74,247

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.

04the grantee network

56 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

56/56

Grantees still filing

51/56

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Animals$8,275,653Other$640,609Environment$295,326Education$108,727International$65,000Philanthropy$40,000Arts & Culture$26,500

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.

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.

Zoological Society of San DiegoCA31.2× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Zoological Society of San Diego · Houston Zoo Inc · Detroit Zoological Society · Utah Zoological Society · Jacksonville Zoological Society Inc · American Association Of · Zoological Society of Cincinnati · Dallas Zoo Management Inc · National Geographic Society · East Coast Zoological · Seaworld & Busch Gardens Conservation Fund · Dallas Zoological Society

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 organisation COLUMBUS ZOOLOGICAL PARK ASSOCIATION 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

6get no government money at all

2rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: ACTION FOR CHEETAS IN KENYA.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

5 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 4.5× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 821871800 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on ACTION FOR CHEETAS IN KENYA, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 28% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Columbus Zoological Park Association?

Find your warmest path to Columbus Zoological Park Association through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

COLUMBUS ZOOLOGICAL PARK ASSOCIATION

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

56 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Columbus Zoological Park Association?

More from the funding graph

COLUMBUS ZOOLOGICAL PARK ASSOCIATION

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

56 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Columbus Zoological Park Association?

More from the funding graph