Skip to content
Columbus Zoological Park Association at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Columbus Zoological Park Association

Empowering people.

$1.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
21
Grants FY2024still arriving
14
States reached
$218k
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 2024.

Animals$9.4MEnvironment$5kHealth$5k
02FY2024 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 21 grants below total $862,544, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,195,223 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $332,679 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k16 grants · $270k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $587k
$10,010
Median grant
14
States reached
$314M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL$25,000
INTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION$25,000
FRIENDS OF BONOBOS$25,000
SAVE THE MANATEE CLUB INC$20,000
WIDECAST$10,010
INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION$10,000
GRACE CENTER INC$10,000
CHEETAH CONSERVATION FUND$10,000
SECORE INTERNATIONAL$10,000
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 89% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%AFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND: $25k → 8%CBSG (AMPHIBIAN ARK): $25k → 6%FRIENDS OF BONOBOS: $27k → 11%MONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION: $30k → 12%RESEARCH FOUNDATION FOR THE CITY: $74k → 17%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $53k → 28%INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $35k → 11%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $79k → 12%AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $30k → 14%SEA TO SHORE ALLIANCE: $45k → 9%CLEARWATER MARINE AQUARIUM RESEARCH: $106k → 12%DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $155k → 13%OHIO WILDLIFE CENTER: $34k → 5%INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS: $1.9M → 15%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $35k → 17%CHEETAH CONSERVATION FUND: $76k → 9%ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS & AQUARIUMS: $25k → 8%WILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $22k → 10%MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $21k → 6%FRIENDS OF BONOBOS: $25k → 11%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY GLOBAL RESOURCES: $36k → 28%INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $30k → 11%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $152k → 12%SEA TO SHORE ALLIANCE: $45k → 9%DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $46k → 13%OHIO WILDLIFE CENTER: $33k → 5%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $25k → 15%INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS: $1.7M → 15%CHEETAH CONSERVATION FUND: $46k → 9%INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $30k → 11%DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $40k → 13%OHIO WILDLIFE CENTER: $25k → 5%INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS INC: $218k → 15%CHEETAH CONSERVATION FUND: $43k → 9%DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $35k → 13%THE WILDS: $200k → 15%DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $29k → 13%INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS: $200k → 15%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $32k → 11%DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $25k → 13%SECORE INTERNATIONAL: $35k → 15%INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS: $175k → 15%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $22k → 11%DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $25k → 13%SECORE INTERNATIONAL: $25k → 15%INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS: $150k → 15%SECORE INTERNATIONAL: $25k → 15%INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS: $150k → 15%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

NH
WA
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
OH
PA
CT
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
VA
MD
AZ
NM
NC
SC
DC
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $254k on the FY2024 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.

Sub-Saharan Africa$231k · 91% · 8 grants

Stated purpose: ANIMAL CONSERVATION

East Asia and the Pacific$23k · 9% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: ANIMAL CONSERVATION

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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$9.1M · 33 repeat orgs$367k to everyone else

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

33
23

Total granted

$9.1M
$352k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
+44%

Still filing today

97%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
AnimalsEnvironmentEducationPhilanthropyArts & CultureScience & TechOther
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

  • IC
    INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $4.6M · revenue +34%
  • REWILD
    2× · 2023–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +41%
  • MI
    MGVP INC Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project
    8× · 2017–2024 · $630k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • RF
    Research Foundation of the City University of New York
    one grant, 2023 · $74k · revenue +11%
  • AA
    AFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +330%
  • AA
    AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +83%
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
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
2
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
3
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
4
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
5
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
6
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
7
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
8
Rainforest Trust

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

International
9
Wildlife Impact

Protect wildlife and ecosystems through research, evidence-based evaluation, capacity development and advocacy.

Animals
10
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
11
Zambia Carnivore Programme

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

Animals
12
Wildlife Sos

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

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wildlife Conservation Network Inc; the most unlike its peers is Stratford Ecological Center 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

57 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. 57 of the 58 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)
16
Early backer (in before they grew)
57/57
Grantees still filing
47/57
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS INC: $4,594,600 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS INCREWILD: $1,054,600 · AnimalsREWILDMGVP INC Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project: $630,053 · AnimalsMGVP INC Mountain Gorilla Veterinary ProjectTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $300,565 · Animals+33 more: $1,708,335 · Animals+33 moreDian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc: $375,225 · OtherSea to Shore Alliance: $129,500 · OtherTHE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $54,767 · Other+7 more: $68,617 · OtherPEOPLE AND CARNIVORES INC: $124,576 · EnvironmentSECORE INTERNATIONAL INC: $115,000 · EnvironmentTHE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION: $55,750 · EnvironmentResearch Foundation of the City University of New York: $73,760 · EducationWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $19,967 · EducationKASIISI PROJECT INC: $15,000 · EducationGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $65,000 · InternationalGREATER GOOD CHARITIES: $35,000 · PhilanthropyAMPHIBIAN ARK: $5,000 · PhilanthropySMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $14,750 · Arts & CultureTHE FOUR CORNERS INSTITUTE: $11,750 · Arts & Culture
Animals$8,288,153Other$628,109Environment$295,326Education$108,727International$65,000Philanthropy$40,000Arts & Culture$26,500

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 budgetINTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS INC: $4,594,600 over 8y, 19% of budgetREWILD: $1,054,600 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetMGVP INC Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project: $630,053 over 8y, 14% of budgetDian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc: $375,225 over 8y, 2.2% of budgetTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $300,565 over 5y, 4.0% of budgetCheetah Conservation Fund: $224,801 over 7y, 2.8% of budgetOHIO WILDLIFE CENTER: $148,105 over 8y, 2.4% of budgetClearwater Marine Aquarium Inc: $131,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetSea to Shore Alliance: $129,500 over 4y, 16% of budgetPEOPLE AND CARNIVORES INC: $124,576 over 8y, 6.5% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $123,855 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF BONOBOS: $120,790 over 6y, 5.0% of budgetSECORE INTERNATIONAL INC: $115,000 over 6y, 5.1% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $114,635 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION: $106,201 over 7y, 1.9% of budgetSAVE THE MANATEE CLUB INC: $80,000 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetResearch Foundation of the City University of New York: $73,760 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INC: $73,575 over 4y, 4.0% of budgetGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $65,000 over 4y, 2.7% of budgetWILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $63,125 over 4y, 6.4% of budgetTHE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION: $55,750 over 5y, 4.7% of budgetINTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $51,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetGLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK: $50,000 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetMONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $45,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $37,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER GOOD CHARITIES: $35,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $31,212 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWIDECAST Wider Caribbean Sea Turtle Conservation Network Inc: $29,216 over 3y, 5.2% of budgetWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $25,420 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND INC: $25,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $21,050 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWildlife Conservation Global Inc: $21,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetNorthwestern University: $20,640 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAfrican Wildlife Conservation Fund Inc: $20,000 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $19,967 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPOLAR BEARS INTERNATIONAL: $18,550 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetPROJECT SURVIVAL: $15,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetKASIISI PROJECT INC: $15,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $14,750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT PRIMATE INC: $12,500 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetTHE FOUR CORNERS INSTITUTE: $11,750 over 2y, 21% of budgetJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGORILLA REHABILITATION CONSERVATION EDUCATION (GRACE) CENTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetARCAS WILD LIFE RESCUE AND CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION LTD AKA ARCAS: $9,700 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetCARNIVORES LIVELIHOODS AND LANDSCAPES: $9,271 over 1y, 28% 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.

Zoological Society of…Houston Zoo IncJacksonville Zoologic…Utah Zoological Socie…Dallas Zoo Management…Detroit Zoological So…Zoological Society of…East Coast Zoological…The Margot Marsh Biod…Arcus FoundationNational Geographic S…Riverbanks Society
Zoological Society of San DiegoCA26.3× affinity10 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 · Jacksonville Zoological Society Inc · Utah Zoological Society · Dallas Zoo Management Inc · Detroit Zoological Society · Zoological Society of Cincinnati · East Coast Zoological Society of Florida Inc · The Margot Marsh Biodiversity Foundation · Arcus Foundation · National Geographic Society · Riverbanks Society

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 Columbus Zoological Park Association funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Columbus Zoological Park Association. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 55%
  • Pan African Sanctuary Alliance Inc: 68% of income from government
  • African Aquatic Conservation Fund Inc: 55% of income from government
  • Giraffe Conservation Foundation Usa: 2% of income from government
  • Clearwater Marine Aquarium Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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 58 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Columbus Zoological Park Association’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