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

· Public charity

Idaho Zoological Society Inc

The fozb is a membership organization that supports zoo boise in the areas of animal acquisition, capital improvement projects, fundraising activities, volunteer opportunities, and educational programs.

$363k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0184% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Environment$745kAnimals$230kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 12 grants below total $334,209, the rows itemized in this filing. The $363,309 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $29,100 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $118k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $200k
$15,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$14M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$200,000
RED PANDA NETWORK$18,209
SNOW LEOPARD TRUST$15,000
THE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION$15,000
PASO PACIFICO$15,000
WILDLIFE SOS$15,000
CITY OF BOISE FOOTHILLS HABITAT RESTORATION$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
TIGER SPECIES SURVIVAL PLAN$10,000
THE WOLVERINE FOUNDATION$10,000
GLOBAL PENGUIN SOCIETY$8,000
XERCES SOCIETY$8,000
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 79% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%TIGER SSPTIGER CONSERVATION CAMPAI: $12k → 11%LAND TRUST OF THE TREASURE VALLEY: $6k → 8%IDAHO FOUNDATION OF PARKS AND LANDS: $8k → 11%GORONGOSA RESTORATION PROJECT: $210k → 11%TIGER SPECIES SURVIVAL PLAN: $12k → 6%THE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION: $15k → 22%GLOBAL PENGUIN SOCIETY: $8k → 10%GORONGOSA NATIONAL PARK: $200k → 14%AFRICAN HORNBILL SAFE: $10k → 10%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $10k → 13%XERCES SOCIETY: $8k → 12%RED PANDA NETWORK: $18k → 15%THE WOLVERINE FOUNDATION: $10k → 9%WILDLIFE SOS: $15k → 8%SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $15k → 9%LAND TRUST OF THE TREASURE VALLEY: $6k → 8%GORONGOSA RESTORATION PROJECT: $200k → 11%TIGER SPECIES SURVIVAL PLAN: $10k → 6%THE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION: $15k → 22%GLOBAL PENGUIN SOCIETY: $8k → 10%WORLD WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $10k → 14%XERCES SOCIETY: $8k → 12%RED PANDA NETWORK: $17k → 15%WILDLIFE SOS: $15k → 8%THE INTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUS: $15k → 9%BOISE PARKS & REC: $50k → 8%GORONGOSA RESTORATION PROJECT: $184k → 11%MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $10k → 6%THE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION: $15k → 22%GLOBAL PENGUIN SOCIETY: $8k → 10%XERCES SOCIETY: $8k → 12%RED PANDA NETWORK: $15k → 15%WILDLIFE SOS: $15k → 8%THE INTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUS: $15k → 9%CITY OF BOISE FOOTHILLS HABITAT RESTORATION: $10k → 8%TIGER SPECIES SURVIVAL PLAN: $10k → 6%THE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION: $10k → 22%RED PANDA NETWORK: $10k → 15%WILDLIFE SOS: $10k → 8%THE INTERNATIONAL SNOW LEAPARD TRUS: $14k → 9%BOISE PARKS & REC: $10k → 8%THE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION: $10k → 22%WILDLIFE SOS: $9k → 8%THE INTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUS: $9k → 9%CITY OF BOISE FOOTHILLS HABITAT RES: $10k → 8%CITY OF BOISE FOOTHILLS HABITAT RES: $10k → 8%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

WA
ID
MN
OR
PA
CA
UT
MD
AZ
DC
FL
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.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 14 repeat orgs$280k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
5

Total granted

$1.1M
$50k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+132%

Still filing today

57%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 31% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $230k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEnvironmentPhilanthropyOther
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

  • IS
    INTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST
    5× · 2020–2025 · $68k · revenue +47%
  • TN
    THE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION
    5× · 2020–2025 · $65k · revenue +116%
  • WS
    WILDLIFE SOS
    5× · 2020–2025 · $64k · revenue +83%

Funded once

  • TS
    TIGER SSPTIGER CONSERVATION CAMPAI
    one grant, 2023 · $12k
  • MZ
    MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +132%
  • GC
    GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
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
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
3
Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership
Environment
4
Idaho Wildlife Federation

The Idaho Wildlife Federation (IWF) promotes the conservation of Idaho's wildlife heritage and legacy of sporting opportunities for the current and future generations.

Animals
5
Interlaken Wildlife Foundation
Animals
6
Wyoming Wildlife Advocates

To promote science-based wildlife management that fosters ecosystem health and dynamic equilibrium between species throughout the state of wyoming.

Animals
7
Sos Rhino
Animals
8
Idaho Conservation League Inc

Icl's mission is to create a conservation community and pragmatic, enduring solutions that protect and restore the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the land and wildlife you love.

—
9
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
10
Teton Regional Land Trust Inc

The mission of the teton regional land trust is to conserve working farms and ranches, fish and wildlife habitat, and scenic open spaces in eastern idaho for this and future generations.

Environment
11
Bear Trust International

Bear trust international works to conserve all eight species of the world's bears, other wildlife, and habitat. we believe that wild bears in their natural habitat are key indicators of ecosystem health. their ability to sustain themselves…

Environment
12
Rainforest Trust

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

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Minnesota Zoo Foundation; the most unlike its peers is The Wolverine Foundation. 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

11 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. 11 of the 23 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GORONGOSA RESTORATION PROJECT: $593,674 · OtherGORONGOSA RESTORATION PROJECTIndividual grant recipient: $200,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $60,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+9 more: $152,500 · Other+9 moreINTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $67,880 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOP…Paso Pacifico: $66,542 · AnimalsPaso PacificoWILDLIFE SOS: $63,500 · AnimalsWILDLIFE SOSRED PANDA NETWORK: $60,467 · AnimalsRED PANDA NETWORKXERCES SOCIETY INC: $24,000 · AnimalsXERCES SOCIETY INCMINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $10,000 · AnimalsTHE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION: $65,000 · EnvironmentLAND TRUST OF THE TREASURE VALLEY: $11,200 · EnvironmentIDAHO RIVERS UNITED: $11,200 · EnvironmentIDAHO FOUNDATION FOR PARKS AND LANDS: $7,500 · EnvironmentTHE WOLVERINE FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Philanthropy
Other$1,006,174Animals$292,389Environment$94,900Philanthropy$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetINTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $67,880 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetPaso Pacifico: $66,542 over 5y, 2.3% of budgetTHE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION: $65,000 over 5y, 9.6% of budgetWILDLIFE SOS: $63,500 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetRED PANDA NETWORK: $60,467 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetXERCES SOCIETY INC: $24,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetLAND TRUST OF THE TREASURE VALLEY: $11,200 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetIDAHO RIVERS UNITED: $11,200 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetMINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE WOLVERINE FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetIDAHO FOUNDATION FOR PARKS AND LANDS: $7,500 over 1y, 0.3% 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 INTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST ↗
  • Who funds Paso Pacifico ↗
  • Who funds THE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WILDLIFE SOS ↗
  • Who funds RED PANDA NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds XERCES SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds LAND TRUST OF THE TREASURE VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds IDAHO RIVERS UNITED ↗
  • Who funds MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE WOLVERINE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds IDAHO FOUNDATION FOR PARKS AND LANDS ↗

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.

American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Endowment FoundationOH9.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Idaho Zoological Society Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Idaho 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%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Xerces Society Inc: 22% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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 23 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Idaho 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