Skip to content
Costolo Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Costolo Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$625k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$150k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Environment$830kPhilanthropy$100kAnimals$10k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $600k
$100,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION$150,000
ELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC$100,000
PACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE$100,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$100,000
CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION$100,000
SARARA INSTITUTE$50,000
TETON COUNTY SEARCH & RESCUE FOUNDATION$25,000
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 (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 35% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $100k → 7%RETETI ELEPHANT PROJECT INC: $10k → 17%ELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $100k → 14%SARARA INSTITUTE: $50k → 12%PACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE: $100k → 9%CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $100k → 7%GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $150k → 5%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $100k → 7%SARARA INSTITUTE: $50k → 12%PACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE: $100k → 9%CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $100k → 7%GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $100k → 5%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $100k → 7%SARARA INSTITUTE: $10k → 12%PACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE: $50k → 9%CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $100k → 7%TETON COUNTY SEARCH & RESCUE FOUNDATION: $25k → 5%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $50k → 7%PACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE: $50k → 9%WYOMING WETLANDS SOCIETY: $10k → 5%WYOMING WETLANDS SOCIETY: $10k → 5%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.
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 5 repeat orgs$135k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$1.1M
$10k

Still filing today

100%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $125k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentAnimalsPhilanthropyPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION
    4× · 2022–2025 · $400k · revenue +6%
  • PW
    PACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $300k · revenue +56% · 26% of their budget
  • GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION
    2× · 2024–2025 · $250k · revenue -28%

Funded once

  • RE
    RETETI ELEPHANT PROJECT INC
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
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
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
2
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
3
Teton Regional Land Trust Inc

The mission of the teton regional land trust is to conserve working farms and ranches, fish and wildlife habitat, and scenic open spaces in eastern idaho for this and future generations.

Environment
4
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
5
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
6
Jackson Hole Wildlife Foundation

Jackson hole wildlife foundation advances wildlife conservation driven by science, collaboration, and a community of volunteers.

Animals
7
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
8
Akashinga Inc

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

Animals
9
Amazon Conservation Team

The amazon conservation team (act) partners with indigenous and other local communities to protect tropical forests and strengthen traditional culture.

Science & Tech
10
Galapagos Whale Shark Project
—
11
International Snow Leopard Trust

The international snow leopard trust aims to ethically conserve snow leopards and their high mountain ecosystems through partnerships with indigenous peoples and local communities, and through research to improve the understanding of snow…

Animals
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Nature Conservancy; the most unlike its peers is Teton County Search & Rescue Foundation. 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

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 9 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $400,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATIONSARARA INSTITUTE: $110,000 · EnvironmentSARARA INSTITUTEWyoming Wetland Society: $20,000 · EnvironmentPACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE INC: $300,000 · AnimalsPACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE INCELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $100,000 · AnimalsELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOU…THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $350,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY+1 more: $10,000 · OtherGRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $250,000 · PhilanthropyGRAND TETON NATION…Teton County Search & Rescue Foundation: $25,000 · Public Safety & Disaster
Environment$530,000Animals$400,000Other$360,000Philanthropy$250,000Public Safety & Disaster$25,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $400,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $350,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPACIFIC WILD ALLIANCE INC: $300,000 over 4y, 26% of budgetGRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetSARARA INSTITUTE: $110,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetTeton County Search & Rescue Foundation: $25,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetWyoming Wetland Society: $20,000 over 2y, 3.0% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Costolo Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Costolo Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Costolo Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Costolo Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 9 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-PF 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 Costolo Family’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