Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Iowa Chapter of the Foundation for North American

Wildlife population and habitat enhancement

$659k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
9
States reached
$143k
Largest
01What you fund
0197% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20192025.

Animals$3.2MRecreation & Sports$1.1MYouth Development$215kEnvironment$162kPublic Benefit$143kEducation$18kHuman Services$16kCommunity Improvement$13kOther$0
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $26k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $68k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $802k
$20,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$566k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Utah Wild Sheep Foundation$142,500
Utah Wild Sheep Foundation$142,500
Wyoming Wildlife Fund$135,000
Prophet Muskwa Ungulate Enhancement$120,000
Nebraska Game & Parks$80,857
Youth of America Charity$65,540
Youth of America Charity Foundation$65,540
Alaska Wild Sheep Foundation$50,000
Alaska Professional Hunters Assoc$20,000
Alaska Professional Hunters Assn$20,000
Wild Sheep Foundation$14,650
Iowa Department of Natural Resource$13,500
Pass It On Scholastic Shooting Sp$7,500
Idaho Wild Sheep Foundation$5,000
Idaho Wild Sheep Foundation$5,000
02The need
03

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.

Your US giving77% of grant dollars ($3.8M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 23% that went abroad ($1.1M) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 74% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Nebraska Game & Parks: $297k → 13%Wild Sheep Foundation: $33k → 10%Texas Parks & Wildlife: $18k → 10%Pass It On - Scholastic Shooting Sp: $10k → 16%Navajo Nation Dept of Gae & Fish: $52k → 32%Brothers in Arms Safaris: $84k → 11%Iowa Department of Natural Resource: $18k → 6%Howard County Iowa Eatonville Land: $13k → 9%Iowa Department of Natural Resource: $18k → 10%Veterans Programs: $16k → 12%Youth of America Charity: $66k → 12%Midway USA Foundation - Youth Sport: $42k → 17%California Wild Sheep Foundation: $27k → 18%Utah Wild Sheep Foundation: $143k → 5%Utah Wild Sheep Foundation: $143k → 8%Alaska Wild Sheep Foundation: $50k → 10%Grand Teton National Park: $13k → 5%Wyoming Wildlife Fund: $173k → 17%Nebraska Game & Parks: $219k → 13%Wild Sheep Foundation: $21k → 10%Navajo Nation Dept of Game & Fish: $45k → 32%Brothers in Arms Safaris: $20k → 11%Iowa Department of Natural Resource: $14k → 6%Youth of America Charity Foundation: $66k → 12%Midway USA Foundation - Youth Sport: $10k → 17%Utah Wild Sheep Foundation: $143k → 5%Utah Wild Sheep Foundation: $143k → 8%US Nat Park Serv Grand Teton: $11k → 5%Wyoming Wildlife Fund: $171k → 17%Nebraska Game & Parks: $166k → 13%Wild Sheep Foundation: $15k → 10%Brothers in Arms Safaris: $18k → 11%Iowa Department of Natural Resource: $13k → 6%Youth of America Charity Foundation: $42k → 12%Utah Wild Sheep Foundation: $129k → 5%Wyoming Wildlife Fund: $149k → 17%Nebraska Game & Parks: $105k → 13%Brothers in Arms Safaris: $12k → 11%Iowa Department of Natural Resource: $12k → 6%Youth of America Charity Foundation: $15k → 12%Utah Wild Sheep Foundation: $119k → 5%Wyoming Wildlife Fund: $135k → 17%Nebraska Game & Parks: $81k → 13%Iowa Department of Natural Resource: $11k → 6%Wyoming Wildlife Fund: $122k → 17%State of Nebraska Game & Parks: $28k → 13%Wyoming Wildlife Fund: $96k → 17%Wyoming Wildlife Fund: $86k → 17%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

AK
ID
MT
MI
OR
WY
SD
IA
OH
UT
NE
MO
KY
AZ
NM
AL
TX
FL

Beyond the US23% of all-years giving ($1.1M)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Canada$1.1M · 9 grants

Grants abroad, by region — $120k 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.

North America (Canada and Mexico)$120k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: Wildlife population enchancement

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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain. 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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$4.5M · 14 repeat orgs$430k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +64% since the first grant, against -14% for the ones you funded once.

14 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
26

Total granted

$4.5M
$305k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+64%
-14%

Still filing today

36%
8%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $126k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsPublic BenefitOther

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

  • UW
    UTAH WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION
    4× · 2022–2025 · $819k · revenue +80%
  • AP
    ALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTER ASSOCIATION
    7× · 2019–2025 · $182k · revenue +17%
  • WS
    WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION
    7× · 2019–2025 · $93k · revenue +90%

Funded once

  • NN
    Navajo Nation Dept of Gae & Fish
    one grant, 2020 · $52k
  • NN
    Navajo Nation Dept of Game & Fish
    one grant, 2021 · $45k
  • SO
    State of Nebraska Game & Parks
    one grant, 2019 · $28k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Wyoming Sheep Foundation
Food & Nutrition
2
Wyoming Wildlife Advocates

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

Animals
3
Bighorn Institute

Promote and preserve bighorn sheep

Animals
4
Elko Bighorn Sheep Unlimited

To promote the procurement and release of big game species, to assist with the improvement of habitat in NE Nevada area, to assist state and local wildlife management authorities, and to raise funds to support these and related purposes.

Animals
5
Sci Utah Foundation

To ensure the future of wildlife through conservation, education and hunting.

Animals
6
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
7
Alaska Chapter of Delta Waterfowl Foundation

Wildlife Conservation

Animals
8
The Nevada Bighorns Foundation
Education
9
Arizona Wildlife Federation

Arizona Wildlife Federation's purpose is to promote and encourage the conservation, propagation, development and management of fish, game and other wildlife; to promote and encourage the wise use, conservation and restoration of waters,…

Animals
10
Idaho Trappers Association

Idaho trappers association is to preserve a heritage of trapping with promotion of education and sound conservation for balance of fur harvesting while preventing waste of idaho's natural resources.

11
Minnesota-Wisconsin Chapter Foundation for North American Wild

To promote and enhance increasing populations of indigenous wild sheep on the north american continent, to safeguard against the decline or extinction of such species, and to fund programs for professional management of these populations,…

Animals
12
Southwest Environmental Center

To promote and protect Wildlife

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wild Sheep Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Brothers in Arms Foundation Inc. 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

9 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 43 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Prophet Muskwa Ungulate Enhancement — $1,089,810 · OtherProphet Muskwa Ungulate EnhancementWyoming Wildlife Fund — $932,000 · OtherWyoming Wildlife FundNebraska Game & Parks — $868,642 · OtherNebraska Game & ParksALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTER ASSOCIATION — $182,000 · OtherYouth of America Charity Foundation — $125,835 · Other+30 more — $550,775 · Other+30 moreUTAH WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION — $819,000 · AnimalsUTAH WILD SHEEP FOUNDAT…WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION — $93,088 · AnimalsWILD SHEEP FOUNDATIONALASKA WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION — $50,000 · Animals+4 more — $55,900 · Animals+4 moreBROTHERS IN ARMS FOUNDATION INC — $142,880 · Public Benefit
Other$3,749,062Animals$1,017,988Public Benefit$142,880

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetUTAH WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION — $819,000 over 4y, 22% of budgetALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTER ASSOCIATION — $182,000 over 7y, 6.2% of budgetBROTHERS IN ARMS FOUNDATION INC — $142,880 over 5y, 24% of budgetWILD SHEEP FOUNDATION — $93,088 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetALASKA WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetCALIFORNIA CHAPTER OF THE FOUNDATION FOR NORTH AMERICAN WILD SHEEP — $29,000 over 2y, 20% of budgetWYOMING WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetArizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Inc — $6,900 over 1y, 1.3% of budget
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 UTAH WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION
  • Who funds ALASKA PROFESSIONAL HUNTER ASSOCIATION
  • Who funds BROTHERS IN ARMS FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION
  • Who funds ALASKA WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA CHAPTER OF THE FOUNDATION FOR NORTH AMERICAN WILD SHEEP
  • Who funds IDAHO WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds WYOMING WILD SHEEP FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Arizona Desert Bighorn Sheep Inc

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.

Eastern Chapter of the Foundation for NoPA17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Eastern Chapter of the Foundation for No · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Iowa Chapter of the Foundation for North American 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.

2023
202122232425
no gov · 20%2%6%14%25%your share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Iowa Chapter of the Foundation for North American?

    Find your warmest path to Iowa Chapter of the Foundation for North American 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 43 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph