Skip to content
Dallas Zoo Management Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Dallas Zoo Management Inc

Organization's mission to manage, operate and promote the dallas zoo on behalf of the dallas zoological society pursuant to agreement with the city of dallas, including the care and well-being of the zoo's animals and the promotion of the educational, family entertainment, conservation and civic missions of the dallas zoo.

$402k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$25k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Animals$13MEnvironment$210k
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $191,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $402,172 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $211,172 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

  • Under $10k4 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $169k
$15,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$3.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION$25,000
ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS AND AQUARIUMS$25,000
ELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION$25,000
VETERAN WILDLIFE RANGER ALLIANCE$20,500
DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL$20,000
ECOLIFE$18,500
SEA TURTLE INC$15,000
GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION$10,000
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND$10,000
AFRICAN HORNBILL CONSERVATION$7,000
CHEETAH CONSERVATION$5,000
PEREGRINE FUND$5,000
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION GLOBAL INC$5,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SAHARA CONSERVATION FUND - EUROPE: $15k → 15%EARTH WATCH INSTITUTE: $20k → 16%PEREGRINE FUND: $15k → 8%ECOLIFE: $19k → 11%VETERAN WILDLIFE RANGER ALLIANCE: $21k → 14%VETPAW: $25k → 17%TARANGUIRE ELEPHANT CONSERVATION: $20k → 28%DALLAS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $12.4M → 14%TEXAS A&M FOUNDATION: $15k → 22%SEA TURTLE INC: $15k → 23%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $20k → 7%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $15k → 13%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION GLOBAL INC: $20k → 14%INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%AWARE INSTITUTE LLC: $16k → 12%THE DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTL INC: $76k → 13%ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS AND AQUARIUMS: $32k → 8%GRACE CENTER: $15k → 7%EARTH WATCH INSTITUTE: $14k → 16%PEREGRINE FUND: $15k → 8%VETPAW: $25k → 17%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $15k → 28%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE (FT WORTH ZOO): $20k → 11%TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE: $20k → 14%SEA TURTLE INC: $15k → 23%OKAPI CONSERVATION PROJECT: $15k → 14%THE DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTL INC: $31k → 13%ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS AND AQUARIUMS: $26k → 8%GRACE CENTER: $15k → 7%PEREGRINE FUND: $15k → 8%SEA TURTLE INC: $15k → 23%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION GLOBAL INC: $15k → 14%DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $25k → 13%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND: $30k → 14%ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS AND AQUARIUMS: $25k → 8%GRACE CENTER INC: $15k → 7%ELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $35k → 14%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION GLOBAL INC: $15k → 14%DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $20k → 13%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND: $15k → 14%GRACE CENTER: $15k → 7%ELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $25k → 14%THE DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTL INC: $20k → 13%ELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $15k → 14%THE DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $15k → 13%ELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $15k → 14%DIAN FOSSEY GORILLA FUND INTERNATIONAL: $15k → 13%EARTHX: $15k → 14%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
ID
MN
IL
WI
NY
MA
OR
CA
CO
MO
VA
MD
AZ
NC
SC
DC
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $85k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$50k · 59% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION SUPPORT

Central America and the Caribbean$25k · 29% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION SUPPORT

East Asia and the Pacific$10k · 12% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION SUPPORT

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.

9%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 20 repeat orgs$13M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +59% since the first grant, against +23% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
14

Total granted

$1.3M
$13M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+59%
+23%

Still filing today

85%
79%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $46k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEnvironmentInternationalArts & CultureScience & TechRecreation & SportsOther
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
    Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $226k · revenue +98%
  • AA
    AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC
    6× · 2017–2025 · $157k · revenue +83%
  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Global Inc
    7× · 2017–2025 · $155k · revenue +43%

Funded once

  • DZ
    DALLAS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY
    one grant, 2021 · $12M · revenue -16% · 50% of their budget
  • AI
    AWARE INSTITUTE LLC
    one grant, 2017 · $16k
  • ED
    EARTH DAY TEXAS INC
    one grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue -20%
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
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
2
Rainforest Trust

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

International
3
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
4
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
5
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
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
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
8
Global Conservation Force Inc

Global conservation force is dedicated to saving wildlife from extinction through education, anti-poaching and conservation efforts.

Animals
9
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
10
Conservation Society of California

Through management of oakland zoo, the conservation society of california deepens connection with animals, saves wildlife, and inspires champions for the natural world.

Animals
11
Zambia Carnivore Programme

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

Animals
12
Akashinga Inc

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

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Carolina Zoological Society Inc; the most unlike its peers is Earth Day Texas 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

29 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. 29 of the 37 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/29
Grantees still filing
21/29
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DALLAS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $12,400,000 · AnimalsDALLAS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY+15 more: $704,095 · Animals+15 moreDian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc: $226,032 · OtherELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $90,000 · OtherVETPAW INC: $60,000 · OtherTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC: $55,000 · OtherVETERAN WILDLIFE RANGER ALLIANCE: $20,500 · OtherECOLIFE: $18,500 · Other+7 more: $63,000 · OtherWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $70,000 · EnvironmentPARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS: $30,000 · EnvironmentSAHARA CONSERVATION FUND: $15,000 · EnvironmentSEA TURTLE INC: $65,000 · Arts & CultureEARTHWATCH INSTITUTE INC: $34,000 · Science & TechEARTH DAY TEXAS INC: $15,000 · Recreation & SportsTexas A&M Foundation: $15,000 · EducationGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $5,000 · International
Animals$13,104,095Other$533,032Environment$115,000Arts & Culture$65,000Science & Tech$34,000Recreation & Sports$15,000Education$15,000International$5,000

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 budgetDALLAS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $12,400,000 over 1y, 50% of budgetDian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc: $226,032 over 9y, 1.1% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC: $157,250 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetWildlife Conservation Global Inc: $155,000 over 7y, 5.2% of budgetGORILLA REHABILITATION CONSERVATION EDUCATION (GRACE) CENTER INC: $70,000 over 5y, 2.6% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $70,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSEA TURTLE INC: $65,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC: $55,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $52,845 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetCheetah Conservation Fund: $50,000 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION: $47,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $45,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $35,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEARTHWATCH INSTITUTE INC: $34,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS: $30,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $22,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEARTH DAY TEXAS INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTexas A&M Foundation: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAHARA CONSERVATION FUND: $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK: $10,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSEE TURTLES: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetBAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPORT ARANSAS TOURISM BUREAU AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCONSERVATION CENTERS FOR SPECIES SURVIVAL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

Houston Zoo IncColumbus Zoological P…Zoological Society of…Detroit Zoological So…Dallas Zoological Soc…Utah Zoological Socie…Living Desert TheJacksonville Zoologic…East Coast Zoological…Nashville Zoo IncOmaha Zoological Soci…Riverbanks Society
Houston Zoo IncTX24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Houston Zoo Inc · Columbus Zoological Park Association · Zoological Society of San Diego · Detroit Zoological Society · Dallas Zoological Society · Utah Zoological Society · Living Desert The · Jacksonville Zoological Society Inc · East Coast Zoological Society of Florida Inc · Nashville Zoo Inc · Omaha Zoological 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 Dallas Zoo Management Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Dallas Zoo Management Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • See Turtles: 11% of income from government
  • Giraffe Conservation Foundation Usa: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Dallas Zoo Management Inc?

Find your warmest path to Dallas Zoo Management Inc 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 37 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 Zoo Management’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