Skip to content
Houston Zoo Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Houston Zoo Inc

Mission: Connect communities with animals, inspiring action to save wildlife.

$2.8M
Granted FY2024still arriving
23
Grants FY2024still arriving
10
States reached
$341k
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$4.9MHealth$3.1MEnvironment$514kEducation$246kFood & Nutrition$144kInternational$85kYouth Development$76kArts & Culture$64kOther$0
02FY2024 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 23 grants below total $1,048,215, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,790,863 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,742,648 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k17 grants · $355k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $345k
  • $250k+1 grant · $341k
$20,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$381M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Baylor College of Medicine$341,112
Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International$100,000
Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project$100,000
Texas A&M AgriLife Research$76,601
Capitol Area Council - Boy Scouts of America$68,438
International Rhino Foundation$40,000
International Crane Foundation$40,000
Save Giraffes Now$32,300
Texas Conservation Alliance$25,000
UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine$25,000
Fossil Rim Wildlife Center$23,257
International Elephant Foundation$20,000
North Carolina Zoological Society$20,000
American Bird Conservancy$20,000
Wildlife Conservation Network$20,000
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 61% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Telonics Inc: $77k → 11%Ecology Project International: $124k → 9%Wildlife Conservation Network: $257k → 10%University of California - Davis: $80k → 16%Americans for Oxford Inc: $144k → 17%Fossil Rim Wildlife Center: $186k → 9%Capitol Area Council - Boy Scouts of America: $68k → 10%International Rhino Foundation: $40k → 11%Dallas Zoological Scoiety: $37k → 14%Texas A&M AgriLife Research: $77k → 22%Friends of Laguna Atascosa NW: $30k → 23%Wildlife Guardians: $57k → 14%Okapi Conservation Project: $30k → 14%International Crane Fdn: $67k → 9%Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International: $100k → 13%Wildlife Guardians: $111k → 9%Association Zoos & Aquariums: $50k → 8%Ecology Project International: $107k → 9%Wildlife Conservation Network: $246k → 10%UC Davis: $51k → 16%Americans for Oxford Inc: $87k → 17%Fossil Rim Wildlife Center Inc: $122k → 9%Bat Conservation Intl Inc: $40k → 10%Texas A&M Agrilife Research: $37k → 22%Wildlife Guardians: $41k → 14%International Crane Fdn: $50k → 9%Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund Int'l: $50k → 13%Wildlife Guardians: $30k → 9%Amer Assoc - Zoos & Aquariums: $50k → 8%Ecology Project International: $70k → 9%Wildlife Conservation Network: $165k → 10%Univ of California-Davis: $45k → 16%Americans for Oxford Inc: $60k → 17%Save Giraffes Now: $32k → 14%Smithsonian Institution: $60k → 14%International Crane Foundation: $40k → 9%Ecology Project International: $50k → 9%Wildlife Conservation Network: $89k → 10%Univ of California-Davis: $40k → 16%Save Giraffes Now: $30k → 14%Smithsonian Institution: $50k → 14%International Crane Fdn: $40k → 9%Ecology Project International: $50k → 9%Wildlife Conservation Network: $69k → 10%University of California - Davis: $38k → 16%Fort Worth Zoological Association: $94k → 11%Ecology Project International: $30k → 9%Fort Worth Zoological Association: $41k → 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

ME
MT
MN
IL
WI
NY
OR
OH
CA
CO
VA
MD
AZ
TN
NC
DC
OK
GA
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $1.7M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions, $1.6M to organizations and $77k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$1.1M · 64% · 11 grants

Stated purpose: Conservation Heritage Turambe program · Group d'Etude et Recherche sur les Primates 2024 activities support · Hirola Conservation support

South America$391k · 23% · 7 grants

Stated purpose: Support for Armonia Bolivia · Giant Tortoise Movement Ecology program · ECOS conservation support

East Asia and the Pacific$215k · 13% · 4 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: Support for Sunda Pangolin conservation · Hutan Conservation programs · Funding suppoort for Seratu Aatai

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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 12% of Houston Zoo Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Houston Zoo Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.8M · 30 repeat orgs$400k to everyone else

30 repeat relationships: 19 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

30
13

Total granted

$8.8M
$343k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+64%

Still filing today

90%
77%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $57k 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
AnimalsEducationEnvironmentArts & CultureInternationalPhilanthropyOther
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

  • BC
    Baylor College of Medicine
    8× · 2017–2024 · $3.0M · revenue +67%
  • MI
    MGVP INC Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project
    8× · 2017–2024 · $915k · revenue +18%
  • WC
    WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $858k · revenue +302%

Funded once

  • TI
    Telonics Inc
    2× · 2022–2023 · $77k
  • JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $69k · revenue +64%
  • BAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONALgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $40k · revenue +105%
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
Rainforest Trust

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

International
2
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
3
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
4
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
5
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
6
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
7
Wildlife Sos

Protecting india's precious wildlife from poaching, habitat loss, and human exploitation since 1995.

Animals
8
Conservation Society of California

Through management of oakland zoo, the conservation society of california deepens connection with animals, saves wildlife, and inspires champions for the natural world.

Animals
9
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
10
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
11
Zoo Outreach Organisation

Wildlife conservation, research and education.

Environment
12
Wildlife Protection Solutions

To protect endangered species.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wildlife Conservation Network Inc; the most unlike its peers is William Marsh Rice University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

41 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. 41 of the 47 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
41/41
Grantees still filing
29/41
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MGVP INC Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project: $915,000 · AnimalsMGVP INC Mountain Gorilla Veterinary ProjectWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $857,599 · AnimalsWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INCGEORGE MIKSCH SUTTON AVIAN RESEARCH CENTER INC: $331,308 · AnimalsGEORGE MIKSCH SUTTON AVIAN RESEARCH CENTER INCWILDLIFE GUARDIANS: $250,065 · AnimalsWILDLIFE GUARDIANSINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $242,186 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INCAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC: $140,000 · AnimalsTHE FORT WORTH ZOOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION: $135,638 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION: $130,000 · Animals+17 more: $817,325 · Animals+17 moreBaylor College of Medicine: $3,001,923 · EducationBaylor College of MedicineAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC: $299,917 · EducationAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC+2 more: $79,166 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $324,750 · OtherUNIVERSITY…Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc: $240,000 · OtherDian Fosse…TEXAS A&M AGRILIFE RESEARCH: $113,608 · OtherTEXAS A&M …Telonics Inc: $76,783 · OtherTelonics I…TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY: $51,440 · OtherTEXAS STAT…BAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL: $40,000 · Other+3 more: $23,510 · OtherECOLOGY PROJECT INTERNATIONAL: $430,500 · EnvironmentECOLOGY P…FOSSIL RIM WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $331,307 · EnvironmentFOSSIL RI…+2 more: $25,552 · EnvironmentSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $170,000 · Arts & CultureTHE FOUR CORNERS INSTITUTE: $13,750 · Arts & CultureBOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA #564 CAPITOL AREA COUNCIL: $75,988 · Youth DevelopmentFRIENDS OF LAGUNA ATASCOSA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE: $30,000 · PhilanthropyMARALLIANCE: $23,150 · International
Animals$3,819,121Education$3,381,006Other$870,091Environment$787,359Arts & Culture$183,750Youth Development$75,988Philanthropy$30,000International$23,150

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 budgetBaylor College of Medicine: $3,001,923 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetMGVP INC Mountain Gorilla Veterinary Project: $915,000 over 8y, 12% of budgetWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $857,599 over 7y, 1.2% of budgetECOLOGY PROJECT INTERNATIONAL: $430,500 over 6y, 12% of budgetGEORGE MIKSCH SUTTON AVIAN RESEARCH CENTER INC: $331,308 over 2y, 18% of budgetFOSSIL RIM WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $331,307 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC: $299,917 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetWILDLIFE GUARDIANS: $250,065 over 5y, 5.4% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC: $242,186 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetDian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc: $240,000 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $170,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC: $140,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetTHE FORT WORTH ZOOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION: $135,638 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION: $130,000 over 7y, 2.6% of budgetWildlife Conservation Global Inc: $125,000 over 4y, 4.7% of budgetGORILLA REHABILITATION CONSERVATION EDUCATION (GRACE) CENTER INC: $109,500 over 5y, 4.3% of budgetGLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK: $82,000 over 8y, 1.5% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $80,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetBOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA #564 CAPITOL AREA COUNCIL: $75,988 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $69,166 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAVE GIRAFFES NOW: $62,300 over 2y, 6.1% of budgetDALLAS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $54,456 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetREWILD: $46,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTexas Conservation Alliance: $45,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetBAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL: $40,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $40,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $35,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF LAGUNA ATASCOSA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE: $30,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetTHE TURTLE SURVIVAL ALLIANCE FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetMINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetMARALLIANCE: $23,150 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetKNOXVILLE ZOOLOGICAL GARDENS INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican Bird Conservancy: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPINES AND PRAIRIES LAND TRUST: $15,552 over 1y, 23% of budgetTHE FOUR CORNERS INSTITUTE: $13,750 over 1y, 14% of budgetWHITE OAK CONSERVATION FOUNDATION INC: $11,069 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetWilliam Marsh Rice University: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPORT ARANSAS TOURISM BUREAU AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOLUMBUS ZOOLOGICAL PARK ASSOCIATION: $7,000 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…Columbus Zoological P…Jacksonville Zoologic…Dallas Zoological Soc…Utah Zoological Socie…Nashville Zoo IncDetroit Zoological So…Zoological Society of…National Fish and Wil…National Geographic S…Riverbanks SocietyThe Caldwell Foundati…
Dallas Zoo Management IncTX24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Dallas Zoo Management Inc · Columbus Zoological Park Association · Jacksonville Zoological Society Inc · Dallas Zoological Society · Utah Zoological Society · Nashville Zoo Inc · Detroit Zoological Society · Zoological Society of San Diego · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · National Geographic Society · Riverbanks Society · The Caldwell 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 Houston Zoo Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Houston Zoo Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 68%
  • George Miksch Sutton Avian Research Center Inc: 68% of income from government
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
7report 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 47 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 Houston Zoo’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