Skip to content

· Public charity

Dallas Zoological Society

Support of the dallas zoo as an outstanding center of education, entertainment and wildlife conservation through fundraising, volunteerism, promoting public awareness and participation, and enhancing the visitor experience.

$5.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$5.7M
Largest
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$12MEnvironment$50k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $62k
  • $250k+1 grant · $5.7M
$17,071
Median grant
3
States reached
$51M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC$5,735,366
INTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION$25,000
TONKOLILI$17,071
SAVE GIRAFFES NOW$10,000
TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE$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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%PEREGRINE FUND: $21k → 8%DALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC: $6.7M → 14%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $5k → 12%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND: $25k → 14%TONKOLILI: $17k → 11%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION GLOBAL INC: $7k → 14%INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION: $75k → 9%THE DIAN FOSSY GORILLA FUND INTL INC: $20k → 13%GORILLA REHABILITATION & CONSERVATION EDUCATION CENTER: $35k → 12%LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $5k → 14%JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE: $15k → 6%CHEETAH CONSERVATION: $10k → 9%GRACE CENTER INC: $5k → 7%DALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC: $5.7M → 14%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $10k → 12%INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION: $5k → 9%CHEETAH CONSERVATION FUND: $5k → 9%DALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC: $2.0M → 14%DALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC: $2.0M → 14%DALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC: $1.1M → 14%DALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC: $57k → 14%ELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $20k → 14%ELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $20k → 14%SAVE GIRAFFES NOW: $10k → 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
IL
WI
CO
VA
MD
SC
DC
GA
TX
FL
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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$18M · 6 repeat orgs$218k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
10

Total granted

$18M
$191k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+65%
+73%

Still filing today

83%
90%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k 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
AnimalsEnvironmentOther
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

  • DZ
    DALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC
    6× · 2017–2025 · $18M · revenue +28%
  • INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2021–2024 · $80k · revenue +102%
  • IE
    INTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION
    2× · 2021–2025 · $30k · revenue +65%

Funded once

  • AA
    AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $39k · revenue +83%
  • GR
    GORILLA REHABILITATION CONSERVATION EDUCATION (GRACE) CENTER INC
    one grant, 2023 · $35k · revenue -57%
  • WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +28%
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
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
2
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
3
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
4
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
5
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
6
Rainforest Trust

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

International
7
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
8
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
9
Akashinga Inc

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

Animals
10
Noble Gorilla Reserve Foundation
—
11
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
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wildlife Conservation Global Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Peregrine Fund 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

15 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. 15 of the 18 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
13/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC: $17,540,232 · AnimalsDALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC+11 more: $270,195 · AnimalsELEPHANT HAVENS WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $40,000 · OtherTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC: $21,000 · OtherDian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc: $19,569 · OtherTONKOLILI CHIMPANZEE PROJECT INC: $17,071 · OtherGRACE CENTER INC: $5,000 · OtherWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $25,000 · Environment
Animals$17,810,427Other$102,640Environment$25,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC: $17,540,232 over 6y, 16% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $80,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC: $38,595 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetGORILLA REHABILITATION CONSERVATION EDUCATION (GRACE) CENTER INC: $35,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC: $21,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTexas Conservation Alliance: $20,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetCheetah Conservation Fund: $15,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION: $14,600 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSAVE GIRAFFES NOW: $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetWildlife Conservation Global Inc: $7,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Dallas Zoo Management IncTX17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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.

    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 18 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 Zoological Society’s filings →

    More from the funding graph