Skip to content
Fox Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Fox Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$177k
Granted FY2024still arriving
15
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$110k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$772kFood & Nutrition$35kYouth Development$31kHuman Services$27kCommunity Improvement$21kEducation$20kHealth$18kHousing & Shelter$13kOther$0
02FY2024 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k12 grants · $47k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $110k
$5,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$4.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND$110,000
ALASKA VILLAGE INITIATIVES$10,000
PINCHOT INSTITUTE FOR CONSERVATION$10,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD$8,000
NJ CONSERVATION FOUNDATION$5,100
SDSU$5,000
ROOT NORTH SHORE INC$5,000
YALE SCHOOL OF ENVIRONMENT$5,000
SUSTAINABLE PRINCETON$5,000
ACCESS YOUTH ACADEMY$5,000
VOICE OF SAN DIEGO$3,000
CATSKILL CENTER FOR CONSERVATION &$2,000
FRIENDS OF HOPEWELL VALLEY$2,000
ATHENAEUM MUSIC & ARTS LIBRARY$1,000
WILDLIFE CENTER FRIENDS$1,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–20, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%SHORELINE COMMUNITY SERVICES: $5k → 11%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
WA
MN
WI
NY
MA
NJ
CT
CA
NM
DC
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$932k · 26 repeat orgs$81k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +74% since the first grant, against +74% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
15

Total granted

$932k
$56k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+74%
+74%

Still filing today

65%
53%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureEducationFood & NutritionHuman ServicesOther
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

  • WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $330k · revenue +28%
  • PI
    PINCHOT INSTITUTE FOR CONSERVATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $215k · revenue +26%
  • SUSTAINABLE PRINCETON INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $63k · revenue +82%

Funded once

  • HR
    HCV RESOURCE NETWORK CO PROFOREST
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
  • FS
    FOREST STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL - US
    one grant, 2017 · $8k
  • OT
    OUTSIDE THE LENSgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $6k · revenue +127%
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
Wildcoast

The mission of wildcoast is to conserve coastal and marine ecosystems and address climate change through natural solutions. our staff is dedicated to conserving threatened and endangered coastlines and wildlife in california and mexico.…

Environment
2
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
3
California Wildlife Foundation

The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species

Animals
4
Nature Collective

Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…

Environment
5
Environment Now
—
6
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
7
California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance

California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.

Environment
8
Conserve Wildlife Foundation of New Jersey Inc

Conserve wildlife foundation of new jersey works to preserve rare and at-risk wildlife in new jersey through field science, habitat restoration, education, and public engagement.

Animals
9
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
10
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

—
11
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
12
Santa Lucia Conservancy

To protect and steward in perpetuity the unique natural, cultural, and asthetic resources of the preserve and serve as a model of ecologically sustainable development to committees outside the preserve.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Shoreline Community Services; the most unlike its peers is Ridgeview Conservancy. 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

28 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. 28 of the 46 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)
12
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/28
Grantees still filing
22/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $330,000 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INCPINCHOT INSTITUTE FOR CONSERVATION: $215,000 · EnvironmentPINCHOT INSTITUTE FOR CONSERVATIONSUSTAINABLE PRINCETON INC: $63,000 · EnvironmentSUSTAINABLE PRINCETON INCNEW JERSEY CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $62,350 · EnvironmentNEW JERSEY CONSERVATION FOUNDATION+7 more: $24,700 · EnvironmentIndividual grant recipient: $45,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipi…ROOT NORTH SHORE INC: $20,000 · OtherROOT NORTH SHORE INCKITCHENS FOR GOOD: $15,000 · OtherKITCHENS FOR GOODYALE UNIVERSITY OF FES ANNUAL FUND: $15,000 · OtherYALE UNIVERSITY OF FES …ALPHA PROJECT FOR THE HOMELESS: $13,000 · OtherALPHA PROJECT FOR THE H…YALE SCHOOL OF ENVIRONMENT: $10,000 · OtherHCV RESOURCE NETWORK CO PROFOREST: $10,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD: $8,000 · OtherFOREST STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL - US: $7,500 · OtherINTERNATIONAL PLANNED PARENTHOOD FD: $7,500 · OtherCLEAN WATER ACTION: $7,021 · Other+14 more: $51,000 · Other+14 moreTHE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD: $29,500 · Youth DevelopmentACCESS YOUTH ACADEMY: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentOUTSIDE THE LENS: $6,000 · Youth DevelopmentSAN DIEGO HUNGER COALITION: $20,000 · Food & NutritionYale University: $10,000 · EducationSAN DIEGO FUTURES FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EducationLIBRARY ASSOCIATION OF LA JOLLA: $2,000 · EducationVOICE OF SAN DIEGO: $10,000 · Arts & CultureTHE MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART LOS ANGELES: $1,000 · Arts & CultureAlaska Village Initiatives: $10,000 · Philanthropy
Environment$695,050Other$209,021Youth Development$60,500Food & Nutrition$20,000Education$17,000Arts & Culture$11,000Philanthropy$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $330,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetPINCHOT INSTITUTE FOR CONSERVATION: $215,000 over 8y, 5.1% of budgetSUSTAINABLE PRINCETON INC: $63,000 over 8y, 3.2% of budgetNEW JERSEY CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $62,350 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetTHE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD: $29,500 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetACCESS YOUTH ACADEMY: $25,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetSAN DIEGO HUNGER COALITION: $20,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetKITCHENS FOR GOOD: $15,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetALPHA PROJECT FOR THE HOMELESS: $13,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSAN DIEGO COASTKEEPER: $10,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetVOICE OF SAN DIEGO: $10,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetYale University: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAlaska Village Initiatives: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCLEAN WATER ACTION: $7,021 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetOUTSIDE THE LENS: $6,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetLA JOLLA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAN DIEGO FUTURES FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetRidgeview Conservancy: $3,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetFRIENDS OF PRINCETON OPEN SPACE: $2,200 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetLIBRARY ASSOCIATION OF LA JOLLA: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWILDLIFE CENTER FRIENDS INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetCATSKILL CENTER FOR CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCLEAN WATER FUND: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF HERRONTOWN WOOD: $1,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetTHE MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART LOS ANGELES: $1,000 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.

  • Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds PINCHOT INSTITUTE FOR CONSERVATION ↗
  • Who funds SUSTAINABLE PRINCETON INC ↗
  • Who funds NEW JERSEY CONSERVATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE FOREST STEWARDS GUILD ↗
  • Who funds ACCESS YOUTH ACADEMY ↗
  • Who funds SAN DIEGO HUNGER COALITION ↗
  • Who funds KITCHENS FOR GOOD ↗
  • Who funds ALPHA PROJECT FOR THE HOMELESS ↗
  • Who funds SAN DIEGO COASTKEEPER ↗
  • Who funds VOICE OF SAN DIEGO ↗
  • Who funds Yale University ↗
  • Who funds Alaska Village Initiatives ↗
  • Who funds CLEAN WATER ACTION ↗
  • Who funds OUTSIDE THE LENS ↗
  • Who funds LA JOLLA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ECOLOGICAL BUILDING NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SAN DIEGO FUTURES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SHORELINE COMMUNITY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds Ridgeview Conservancy ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF PRINCETON OPEN SPACE ↗
  • Who funds LIBRARY ASSOCIATION OF LA JOLLA ↗
  • Who funds WILDLIFE CENTER FRIENDS INC ↗
  • Who funds CATSKILL CENTER FOR CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT INC ↗

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 San Diego Foundat…Jewish Community Foun…Price Philanthropies …The Conrad Prebys Fou…Sempra FoundationKarney Flaster Family…The Parker FoundationThe Cushman FoundationMufg Union Bank Found…Rancho Santa Fe Found…The Nordson Corporati…The Intuit Foundation
The San Diego FoundationCA22.1× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The San Diego Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego · Price Philanthropies Foundation · The Conrad Prebys Foundation · Sempra Foundation · Karney Flaster Family Foundation · The Parker Foundation · The Cushman Foundation · Mufg Union Bank Foundation Ag · Rancho Santa Fe Foundation · The Nordson Corporation Foundation · The Intuit 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 Fox Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fox Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Yale University: 12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
12report 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 46 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-PF 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 Fox’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