Skip to content
Fort Wayne Zoological Society Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Fort Wayne Zoological Society Inc

Connecting kids and animals, strengthening families, and inspiring people to care.

$149k
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
10
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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$514kEnvironment$120kEducation$23k
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $96,202, the rows itemized in this filing. The $149,231 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $53,029 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.
$7,452
Median grant
10
States reached
$40M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION$8,271
TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE$8,189
THE WILDS$8,107
WCS GLOBAL RESOURCES$8,107
OMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY$7,862
GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION - USA$7,500
LITTLE RIVER WETLANDS PROJECT$7,452
LION GUARDIANS$7,452
ACRES LAND TRUST$7,206
THE LEATHERBACK TRUST$7,125
WORLD PARROT TRUST$7,125
NASHVILLE ZOO$6,306
PACIFIC MARINE ANIMAL$5,500
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 81% 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: $10k → 15%OMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $20k → 12%MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $10k → 6%PACIFIC MARINE MAMMAL RESCUE CENTER: $10k → 10%ORANGUTAN CONSERVATORY: $10k → 14%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $40k → 28%WORLD PARROT TRUST: $10k → 10%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $15k → 12%LION GUARDIANS: $15k → 14%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION CENTER: $50k → 13%SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN LAND CONSERVANCY INC: $9k → 12%PAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE: $15k → 12%RED PANDA NETWORK: $50k → 15%NASHVILLE ZOO: $10k → 14%ACRES INC: $13k → 12%PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $20k → 19%THE WILDS: $8k → 5%ASSOCIATION OF ZOOS AND AQUARIUMS (AZA): $10k → 8%SAHARA CONSERVATION FUND: $10k → 15%OMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $10k → 12%MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $10k → 6%PACIFIC MARINE MAMMAL RESCUE CENTER: $10k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $10k → 28%WORLD PARROT TRUST: $10k → 10%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $8k → 12%LION GUARDIANS: $15k → 14%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION - USA: $8k → 13%RED PANDA NETWORK: $15k → 15%ACRES LAND TRUST: $9k → 12%PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $15k → 19%OMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $8k → 12%MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $8k → 6%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $10k → 28%WORLD PARROT TRUST: $9k → 10%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $8k → 12%LION GUARDIANS: $10k → 14%RED PANDA NETWORK: $15k → 15%ACRES LAND TRUST: $8k → 12%PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $8k → 19%MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $8k → 6%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $10k → 28%TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE: $8k → 12%LION GUARDIANS: $7k → 14%ACRES LAND TRUST: $8k → 12%WCS GLOBAL RESOURCES: $8k → 28%ACRES LAND TRUST: $7k → 12%LITTLE RIVER WETLANDS PROJECT INC: $8k → 12%LITTLE RIVER WETLANDS PROJECT: $7k → 12%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

MN
MI
NY
OR
IN
OH
CA
NE
VA
MD
AZ
TN
SC
DC
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $32k on the FY2024 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.

Sub-Saharan Africa$19k · 60% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PROGRAM

East Asia and the Pacific$13k · 40% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: CONSERVATION PROGRAM

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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$588k · 14 repeat orgs$64k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +32% since the first grant, against +28% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
5

Total granted

$588k
$49k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
+28%

Still filing today

93%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’21’22’23’24
AnimalsEnvironmentInternationalYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • RP
    RED PANDA NETWORK
    3× · 2021–2023 · $80k · revenue +65%
  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Society
    5× · 2017–2024 · $78k · revenue +59%
  • GC
    GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA
    2× · 2021–2024 · $58k · revenue +22%

Funded once

  • PA
    PAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INC
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue -10%
  • AA
    AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +83%
  • TO
    THE ORANGUTAN CONSERVANCY
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +16%
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
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
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
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
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
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
6
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
7
Zambia Carnivore Programme

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

Animals
8
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
9
Sri Lanka Wild Life Conservation Society

The Sri Lanka Wild Life Conservation Society was set-up to help protect and conserve the diminishing of Sri Lanka and to make the local and international community aware of it's endangered status. It is dedicated to the conservation and…

Environment
10
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
11
Zoo Outreach Organisation

Wildlife conservation, research and education.

Environment
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Minnesota Zoo Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Red Panda Network. 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

21 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. 21 of the 22 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)
21/21
Grantees still filing
15/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RED PANDA NETWORK: $80,000 · AnimalsRED PANDA NETWORKWildlife Conservation Society: $78,107 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation SocietyWILDLIFE GUARDIANS: $47,452 · AnimalsWILDLIFE GUARDIANSTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $44,689 · AnimalsTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATIONOMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $37,862 · AnimalsOMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYMINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $35,771 · AnimalsMINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATIONWORLD PARROT TRUST USA INC: $35,625 · AnimalsWORLD PARROT TRUST USA INCFRIENDS OF THE SEA LIONS INC DBA PACIFIC MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $25,500 · AnimalsFRIENDS OF THE SEA LIONS INC DBA PACIFIC MARINE MAMMAL CENTERNASHVILLE ZOO INC: $16,306 · Animals+5 more: $50,232 · Animals+5 moreACRES Inc: $50,546 · EnvironmentACRES IncSAHARA CONSERVATION FUND: $20,000 · EnvironmentSAHARA CONSERVAT…LITTLE RIVER WETLANDS PROJECT INC: $15,452 · EnvironmentLITTLE RIVER WET…SOUTHWEST MICHIGAN LAND CONSERVENCY INC: $8,500 · EnvironmentSOUTHWEST MICHIG…GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $57,500 · InternationalGIRAFFE C…TRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $43,306 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $5,500 · OtherGibbon Conservation Center: $5,000 · Youth Development
Animals$451,544Environment$94,498International$57,500Other$48,806Youth Development$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 budgetRED PANDA NETWORK: $80,000 over 3y, 4.0% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $78,107 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $57,500 over 2y, 4.3% of budgetACRES Inc: $50,546 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetWILDLIFE GUARDIANS: $47,452 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $44,689 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetOMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $37,862 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $35,771 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetWORLD PARROT TRUST USA INC: $35,625 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE SEA LIONS INC DBA PACIFIC MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $25,500 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetSAHARA CONSERVATION FUND: $20,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetNASHVILLE ZOO INC: $16,306 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLITTLE RIVER WETLANDS PROJECT INC: $15,452 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetPAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ORANGUTAN CONSERVANCY: $10,000 over 1y, 7.8% of budgetSOUTHWEST MICHIGAN LAND CONSERVENCY INC: $8,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR THE PRESERVATION OF WILD ANIMALS INC: $8,107 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLEATHERBACK TRUST INC: $7,125 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $5,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGibbon Conservation Center: $5,000 over 1y, 2.2% 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.

Zoological Society of…Columbus Zoological P…Atlanta Fulton County…Dallas Zoo Management…Jacksonville Zoologic…Detroit Zoological So…The Bank of America C…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…
Zoological Society of San DiegoCA17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Zoological Society of San Diego · Columbus Zoological Park Association · Atlanta Fulton County Zoo Inc · Dallas Zoo Management Inc · Jacksonville Zoological Society Inc · Detroit Zoological Society · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Fort Wayne Zoological Society Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fort Wayne Zoological Society Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 68%
  • Pan African Sanctuary Alliance Inc: 68% of income from government
  • Giraffe Conservation Foundation Usa: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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 22 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Fort Wayne Zoological Society’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