Skip to content
Dallas Safari Club at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Dallas Safari Club

The organization's mission is to conserve wildlife and wilderness lands; to educate the youth and the general public and to promote and protect the rights and interests of hunters worldwide.

$963k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$350k
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, FY2021 to 2025.

Animals$1.9MRecreation & Sports$118kInternational$15kFood & Nutrition$10kCommunity Improvement$10k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $712,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $962,500 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $250,000 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–50k6 grants · $88k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $275k
  • $250k+1 grant · $350k
$15,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$16M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Conservation Force$350,000
DSC Foundation Inc$200,000
Congressional Sportsmens Fou$75,000
Alaska Professional Hunters A$32,500
International Professional Hu$15,000
Feeding Texas$10,000
New Mexico Council of Outfitt$10,000
WYOGA$10,000
Operation Game Thief$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 (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 90% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%OPERATION GAME THIEF: $8k → 10%DSC FOUNDATION INC: $500k → 14%New Mexico Council of Outfitt: $10k → 12%CONGRESSIONAL SPORTMEN'S FOUNDATION: $75k → 14%ARNOLD OUTDOOR WRITER LLC: $8k → 6%SPORTSMAN ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $15k → 15%ALASKA PRFESSIONAL HUNTERS ASSOCIAT: $50k → 10%International Professional Hu: $15k → 7%Conservation Force: $350k → 15%OPERATION GAME THIEF: $8k → 10%DSC FOUNDATION INC: $300k → 14%Congressional Sportsmens Fou: $75k → 14%Alaska Professional Hunters A: $33k → 10%CONSERVATION FORCE: $100k → 15%Feeding Texas: $10k → 10%DSC Foundation Inc: $200k → 14%CONGRESSIONAL SPORTMEN'S FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%ALASKA PRFESSIONAL HUNTERS ASSOCIAT: $30k → 10%PARK CITIES QUAIL INC: $10k → 14%CONGRESSIONAL SPORTMEN'S FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%ALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTERS ASSOCIATION: $25k → 10%CONGRESSIONAL SPORTMEN'S FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%ALASKA PROFESSIONL HUNTERS ASSOCIAT: $20k → 10%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

AK
WY
OH
VA
NM
DC
LA
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $245k 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.

North America (Canada and Mexico)$210k · 86% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: Wildlife Conservati

East Asia and the Pacific$35k · 14% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: Wildlife Conservati

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.
$1.9M · 5 repeat orgs$88k to everyone else

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
3

Total granted

$1.9M
$33k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+104%

Still filing today

80%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $55k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsCommunity ImprovementEnvironmentOther
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

  • DF
    DSC FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $1.0M · revenue -7% · 25% of their budget
  • CF
    CONSERVATION FORCE INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $450k · revenue 0%
  • CS
    CONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOUNDATION
    5× · 2021–2025 · $300k · revenue +32%

Funded once

  • TU
    THE UNITED STATES SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue +104%
  • PC
    PARK CITIES QUAIL INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +98%
  • AO
    ARNOLD OUTDOOR WRITER LLC
    one grant, 2023 · $8k
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
Pa Federation of Sportsmens & Conservationists Inc

The mission of the pfsc is to protect and promote hunting, fishing, trapping and realted sportsmen's rights and privileges, to secure and defend our 2nd amendment rights as guaranteed by the constitution of the united states of america; to…

—
2
Dallas Safari Club

The organization's mission is to conserve wildlife and wilderness lands; to educate the youth and the general public and to promote and protect the rights and interests of hunters worldwide.

—
3
Arizona Wildlife Federation

Arizona Wildlife Federation's purpose is to promote and encourage the conservation, propagation, development and management of fish, game and other wildlife; to promote and encourage the wise use, conservation and restoration of waters,…

Animals
4
Arizona Sportsmen for Wildlife Conservation

The mission of the organization is to educate the public and outdoorsmen about wildlife and wildlife conservation and to raise funds for conservation grants.

Animals
5
Houston Safari Club

To protect the rights of hunters and the hunting heritage through advocacy, policy, and legislation.

—
6
Georgia Wildlife Federation

Advocation and education about protecting wildlife and wildlife habitats.

Animals
7
Inland Northwest Wildlife Council

Promote interest, education, and conservation regarding hunting and fishing and aid in the protection of wildlife. promote sportsman like hunting methods and improve hunter/landowner relations.

Animals
8
West Texas Hunting and Fishing Heritage Museum Inc

The Museum was organized to distribute educational information and data on animals of the world; and provide a channel for organized efforts to promote a public understanding and acceptance of sport hunting as an effective tool for…

Arts & Culture
9
Permian Quail Coalition Inc

The organizations mission is to help preserve, maintain and restore upland game habitat throughout the southwest region of the United States and to improve the quail population in Texas.

Animals
10
Sportsmen for Fish & Wildlife Inc

Promote the protection and enhancement of wildlife habitat, assistance in providing quality wildlife management programs. educating the public about the role hunters play in wildlife conservation and perpetuating the family tradition of…

Animals
11
Professional Outdoor Media Association Inc

Promoting the heritage of hunting, fishing and other outdoor sports and wildlife photography

Community Improvement
12
Wildlife Conservation Foundation

1. To preserve land and wildlife for the use and education of future generations.2. To assist in wildlife management programs that protect and preserve land and wildlife.3. To provide education regardign the importance of hunting and its…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The United States Sportsmen's Alliance Inc; the most unlike its peers is Park Cities Quail 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

10 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. 10 of the 13 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DSC FOUNDATION INC: $1,000,000 · EnvironmentDSC FOUNDATION INCCONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOUNDATION: $300,000 · OtherCONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOU…ALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTER ASSOCIATION: $157,500 · OtherALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTER AS…+5 more: $63,040 · Other+5 moreCONSERVATION FORCE INC: $450,000 · AnimalsCONSERVATION FORCE INC+2 more: $20,000 · AnimalsFEEDING TEXAS: $10,000 · Community ImprovementNEW MEXICO COUNCIL OF OUTFITTERS AND GUIDES: $10,000 · Community Improvement
Environment$1,000,000Other$520,540Animals$470,000Community Improvement$20,000

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 budgetDSC FOUNDATION INC: $1,000,000 over 3y, 25% of budgetCONSERVATION FORCE INC: $450,000 over 2y, 4.9% of budgetCONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOUNDATION: $300,000 over 5y, 1.4% of budgetALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTER ASSOCIATION: $157,500 over 5y, 5.3% of budgetTHE UNITED STATES SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE INC: $15,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetFEEDING TEXAS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPARK CITIES QUAIL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetOPERATION GAME THIEF: $10,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetNEW MEXICO COUNCIL OF OUTFITTERS AND GUIDES: $10,000 over 1y, 8.8% 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.

The Bwana's Club Inc …Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Bwana's Club Inc Dba Dsc South TexTX13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bwana's Club Inc Dba Dsc South Tex · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Dallas Safari Club funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Dallas Safari Club. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 Dallas Safari Club?

    Find your warmest path to Dallas Safari Club 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 13 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 Dallas Safari Club’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