· Public charity
Friends of Tracy Aviary
Tracy aviary's mission is, in partnership with community, inspiring action to conserve birds and habitats.
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 9 grants below total $162,763 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $173,941 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $11,178 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
- Under $10k4 grants · $30k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $54k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $78k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SALT LAKE COMMUNITY COLLEGE | $78,336 |
| WORLD PARROT TRUST | $20,000 |
| SAGELAND COLLABORATIVE | $14,000 |
| OIKONOS | $10,000 |
| MANOMENT INC | $10,000 |
| ENVIRONMENT OF THE AMERICAS | $8,000 |
| AUDOBON ROCKIES | $8,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA | $7,427 |
| THE INSTITUTE OF BIRD POPULATION | $7,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 34% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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
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.
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 +73% since the first grant, against -3% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 5 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, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $112k 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
- WPWORLD PARROT TRUST USA INC6× · 2017–2024 · $127k · revenue +206%
- SCSageland Collaborative4× · 2021–2024 · $91k · revenue +61%
- AAAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC2× · 2017–2018 · $74k · revenue +83%
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF UTAHone grant, 2023 · $90k
- WSWEBER STATE UNIVERSITYone grant, 2017 · $18k
- SOSTATE OF UTAH GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTone grant, 2019 · $8k
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.
We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).
See schedule othe american ornithological society (aos) is an international membership organization that connects ornithologists, science, and bird conservation by supporting science that advances the understanding and conservation of…
The Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology is both a natural history collection specializing in eggs and nests of birds from around the world, and a research and education institution dedicated to bird conservation.
The San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory is dedicated to the conservation of birds and their habitats through science and outreach.
Connecting nature, people, and science for a more resilient world.
To foster and promote appreciation and understanding of the natural world by educational, scientific, investigative, literary, philanthropic and charitable pursuits. michigan audubon connects birds and people for the benefit of both…
Klamath bird observatory advances bird and habitat conservation through science, education, and partnerships.
The waterbird society is composed of biologists, researchers, conservationists, students, and others interested in the behavior, ecology, and conservation of waterbirds. the organization is administered by officers and council members…
Alabama audubon's mission is to promote conservation and a greater knowledge of birds, their habitats, and the natural world.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
To identify and address vital environmental issues by providing medical care to injured birds of prey and shorebirds, and through educational, research and conservation initiatives.
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hawkwatch International Inc and the most unlike its peers is Prescott College Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 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. 16 of the 26 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 WORLD PARROT TRUST USA INC ↗
- Who funds Sageland Collaborative ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC ↗
- Who funds MANOMET INC ↗
- Who funds HAWKWATCH INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFE REHABILITATION CENTER OF NORTHERN UTAH ↗
- Who funds OIKONOS - ECOSYSTEM KNOWLEDGE ↗
- Who funds Tucson Audubon Society ↗
- Who funds THE INSTITUTE FOR BIRD POPULATIONS ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENT AMERICA RESEARCH AND POLICY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds DENVER AUDUBON ↗
- Who funds GREAT BASIN BIRD OBSERVATORY ↗
- Who funds MONTANA AUDUBON ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN BIRD OBSERVATORY ↗
- Who funds PRESCOTT COLLEGE INC ↗
- Who funds WESTMINSTER UNIVERSITY ↗
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: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Patagoniaorg · National Audubon Society Inc · Weeden Foundation · Wildlife Conservation Society · The Fanwood Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc
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 Friends of Tracy Aviary 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.
- Manomet Inc — 12% of income from government
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.