Skip to content
Conservation Nation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Conservation Nation

To strengthen the conservation movement by funding and supporting conservationists from all communities, while educating and inspiring the next generation of wildlife champions.

$633k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$150k
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, FY2022 to 2025.

Animals$545kYouth Development$460kEnvironment$192kHuman Services$51kCivil Rights$8kReligion$8k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $558,874, the rows itemized in this filing. The $633,008 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $74,134 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

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $106k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $453k
$50,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$4.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
City Kids to Wilderness Project Inc$150,000
VIEW Veterinary Initiative for Endangered Wildlife$105,500
African People & Wildlife Fund$97,500
Save the Rhino International Inc$50,000
Inward Bound Mindfulness$50,000
Wildlife Direct Inc$30,000
Elephant Havens Wildlife Foundation Inc$30,000
The Girls Foundation of Tanzania$25,874
Yellowstone Forever$20,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY24–25, $140k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Inward Bound Mindfulness: $90k → 11%Inward Bound Mindfulness: $50k → 11%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

ME
WA
ID
MT
IL
NY
MA
OH
NJ
NC
DC
TX
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.
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 27% of Conservation Nation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Conservation Nationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 24% 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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 8 repeat orgs$99k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
5

Total granted

$1.2M
$69k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
0%

Still filing today

100%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesEnvironmentYouth DevelopmentInternationalCivil RightsOther
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

  • CK
    City Kids to Wilderness Project Inc
    2× · 2024–2025 · $320k · revenue 0%
  • AP
    AFRICAN PEOPLE & WILDLIFE FUND INC
    3× · 2022–2025 · $227k · revenue -13%
  • VI
    VETERINARY INITIATIVE FOR ENDANGERED WILDLIFE INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $206k · revenue -18%

Funded once

  • NP
    Nez Perce Tribe Wildlife Division
    one grant, 2024 · $39k
  • FI
    Field Inclusive Incgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $8k · revenue ×12
  • NN
    NATURES NURSERY CENTER FOR WILDLIFE REHAB & CONSR
    one grant, 2024 · $8k · revenue 0%
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
Intertribal Sinkyone Wilderness Council
—
2
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
3
Akashinga Inc

Deliver ecological stability and long-term protection of large-scale wilderness by supporting and empowering local communities.

Animals
4
Rainforest Trust

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

International
5
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
6
Interlaken Wildlife Foundation
Animals
7
The Nature Institute
—
8
Wildlife Protection Solutions

To protect endangered species.

Animals
9
Global Wildlife Foundation

Funding innovative veterinary research and supporting organizations dedicated to preserving and protecting wildlife for future generations.

Animals
10
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
11
Wildlife Sos

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

Animals
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is African People & Wildlife Fund Inc; the most unlike its peers is Field Inclusive Inc. 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

13 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. 13 of the 14 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
3/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AFRICAN PEOPLE & WILDLIFE FUND INC: $227,107 · AnimalsAFRICAN PEOPLE & WILDLIFE FUND INCVETERINARY INITIATIVE FOR ENDANGERED WILDLIFE INC: $205,500 · AnimalsVETERINARY INITIATIVE FOR ENDANGERED WILDLIFE INCSAVE THE RHINO INTERNATIONAL INC: $100,000 · AnimalsSAVE THE RHINO INTERNATIONAL INCELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $30,000 · Animals+1 more: $7,500 · AnimalsCity Kids to Wilderness Project Inc: $320,000 · Youth DevelopmentCity Kids to Wilderness Proj…INWARD BOUND MINDFULNESS EDUCATION INC: $140,000 · Human ServicesINWARD BOUND MIND…The Girls Foundation of Tanzania: $51,374 · Human ServicesThe Girls Foundat…YELLOWSTONE FOREVER: $60,000 · EnvironmentA ROCHA USA INC A ROCHA USA: $7,500 · EnvironmentWILDLIFEDIRECT INC: $60,000 · InternationalNez Perce Tribe Wildlife Division: $39,369 · OtherField Inclusive Inc: $7,500 · Civil RightsVERMILION SEA INSTITUTE: $7,500 · Education
Animals$570,107Youth Development$320,000Human Services$191,374Environment$67,500International$60,000Other$39,369Civil Rights$7,500Education$7,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCity Kids to Wilderness Project Inc: $320,000 over 2y, 7.6% of budgetAFRICAN PEOPLE & WILDLIFE FUND INC: $227,107 over 3y, 10% of budgetVETERINARY INITIATIVE FOR ENDANGERED WILDLIFE INC: $205,500 over 2y, 17% of budgetINWARD BOUND MINDFULNESS EDUCATION INC: $140,000 over 2y, 9.4% of budgetSAVE THE RHINO INTERNATIONAL INC: $100,000 over 2y, 6.4% of budgetYELLOWSTONE FOREVER: $60,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetWILDLIFEDIRECT INC: $60,000 over 2y, 8.2% of budgetThe Girls Foundation of Tanzania: $51,374 over 2y, 6.1% of budgetELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetNATURES NURSERY CENTER FOR WILDLIFE REHAB & CONSR: $7,500 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetVERMILION SEA INSTITUTE: $7,500 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetA ROCHA USA INC A ROCHA USA: $7,500 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

ImpactassetsincNetwork for GoodNational Philanthropi…Morgan Stanley Global…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
ImpactassetsincMD12× affinity4 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Impactassetsinc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Conservation Nation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Conservation Nation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 32%
  • African People & Wildlife Fund Inc: 32% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 14 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 Conservation Nation’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