· Public charity
Commonwealth Zoological Corporation D/B/A Zoo New England
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 3 grants below total $80,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $125,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $45,000 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HEALTH IN HARMONY | $40,000 |
| US FOR BFREE | $30,000 |
| BAIRD'S TAPIR SURVIVAL ALLIANCE | $10,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 80% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $20k 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.
Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP
Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP
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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your 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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +77% since the first grant, against +55% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION8× · 2017–2024 · $160k · revenue +34%- UFUS FOR BELIZE FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH & ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION INC7× · 2019–2025 · $151k · revenue +181%
- HIHealth in Harmony4× · 2021–2025 · $135k · revenue +77%
Funded once
Cheetah Conservation Fundgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $13k · revenue +147%- WCWildlife Conservation Societygraduatedone grant, 2019 · $13k · revenue +52%
- CNCOUGAR NETWORK INCone grant, 2017 · $9k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
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.
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…
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
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.…
Wildlife conservation, research and education.
Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
To safeguard large carnivores, their prey, and habitat in zambia through applied research, conservation, and education.
The mission of the northern jaguar project is to preserve and recover the world's northermost population of the jaguar, its unique natural habitat, and native wildlife under its protection as a flagship, keystone, and umbrella species.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums Inc and the most unlike its peers is Smithsonian Institution. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 20 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION ↗
- Who funds US FOR BELIZE FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH & ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds Health in Harmony ↗
- Who funds REWILD ↗
- Who funds GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF DURRELL WILDLIFE CONSERVATION TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC ↗
- Who funds Cheetah Conservation Fund ↗
- Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
- Who funds PANTHERA CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds WILD ENTRUST INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds RED PANDA NETWORK ↗
- Who funds THE PEREGRINE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Pollinator Partnership ↗
- Who funds Tennessee Aquarium ↗
- Who funds ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION ↗
- Who funds GORILLA REHABILITATION CONSERVATION EDUCATION (GRACE) CENTER INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Detroit Zoological Society · Jacksonville Zoological Society Inc · Reid Park Zoological Society · Utah Zoological Society · East Coast Zoological Society of Florida Inc · Arizona Center for Nature Conservation · Columbus Zoological Park Association · Zoological Society of San Diego · Network for Good · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation
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 organization Commonwealth Zoological Corporation D/B/A Zoo New England 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Us for Belize Foundation for Research & Environmental Education Inc — 62% of income from government
- Giraffe Conservation Foundation Usa — 2% of income from government
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 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.