· Public charity
Elephant Cooperation
To save elephants and wildlife while feeding and educating children.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 10 grants below total $760,111 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,530,767 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $770,656 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k6 grants · $108k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $345k
- $250k+1 grant · $308k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WILDLIFE WORKS ELEPHANT PROTECTION TRUST | $307,500 |
| WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK | $150,000 |
| SPACE FOR GIANTS | $145,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE | $50,000 |
| GENERATION AWAKENING | $28,000 |
| WILDLIFE CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL | $20,000 |
| AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| LOVE TRIBE PROJECT | $18,611 |
| KENSAP INC | $11,000 |
| UTOPIA SCIENTIFIC | $10,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY19–23, $564k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 97% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $762k on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 14% of Elephant Cooperation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 45% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 40% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +26% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
16 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $81k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- WCWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC3× · 2020–2024 · $551k · revenue +167%
- APAFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA5× · 2017–2022 · $414k · revenue +340%
- SFSpace for Giants USA Inc5× · 2019–2024 · $311k · revenue +32%
Funded once
- TETHE ELLEN FUNDone grant, 2021 · $250k · revenue -93%
- GFGIVEPOWER FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $150k · revenue +11%
UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEFgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $111k · revenue +64%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Funding innovative veterinary research and supporting organizations dedicated to preserving and protecting wildlife for future generations.
Wildlife conservation global, inc. operates the okapi conservation project (ocp) which works in the democratic republic of the congo with the institute in congo for the conservation of nature (iccn) and local communities throughout the…
The Fossey Fund is dedicated to the conservation and study of gorillas in Africa through a successful, people-centered approach: 1) Providing daily protection to gorillas, 2) Scientific research providing critical data on gorillas and…
Grace gorillas is an international ngo working hard to provide excellent care and rewild rescued grauers gorillas while working alongside congolese communities to promote the conservation of wild gorillas and their habitat.
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.
Wild africa fund is dedicated to raising awareness and promoting efforts that preserve africa's natural beauty and wildlife, as well as the communities that rely on it.
Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…
Partnering with local communities to protect iconic species and conserve habitat in the greater amboseli ecosystem.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is African Parks Foundation of America and the most unlike its peers is Air Shepherd. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 13 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
29 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 29 of the 32 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds SMALL STEPS FOR COMPASSION ↗
- Who funds Space for Giants USA Inc ↗
- Who funds THE ELLEN FUND ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN COMMUNITY AND CONSERVATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AIR SHEPHERD ↗
- Who funds GIVEPOWER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds WILD TOMORROW FUND ↗
- Who funds ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFEDIRECT INC ↗
- Who funds BRIDGE MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC ↗
- Who funds LOVE TRIBE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds Utopia Scientific ↗
- Who funds GENERATION AWAKENING ↗
- Who funds International FIRST Committee Associatio co Toohey Law Group ↗
- Who funds MARA ELEPHANT PROJECT USA INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL CONSERVATION FORCE INC ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFE CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds KULUNGU FOR CONGO ↗
- Who funds GEM LEGACY INC ↗
- Who funds KENSAP INC ↗
- Who funds SAVE GIRAFFES NOW ↗
- Who funds The Graceful Warrior Project ↗
- Who funds THE SHECKLER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Charities Aid Foundation America · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Elephant Cooperation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Elephant Cooperation?
Find your warmest path to Elephant Cooperation 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.