· Public charity
International Anti-Poaching Foundation Inc
Deliver ecological stability and long-term protection of large-scale wilderness by supporting and empowering local communities.
Where the money goes
Grants by size, and the largest recipients.
How this is measured
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GLOBAL WILDLIFE CONSERVATION | $8,000 |
Where the grant dollars land
Across the US and around the world.
Grants abroad, by region: $7.1M on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: CASH GRANTS TO PAY FOR CONSERVATION SUPPLIES AND AFRICA ACTIVITIES
How this is measured
1 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.
Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing
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.
How much its grantees rely on government
Each dot is one organization International Anti-Poaching Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from International Anti-Poaching Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.
How this is measured
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to International Anti-Poaching Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to International Anti-Poaching Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.
Play a game based on International Anti-Poaching’s filings →