Skip to content
Minnesota Zoo Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Minnesota Zoo Foundation

The MINNESOTA ZOO FOUNDATION raises contributed income and supports conservation and animal care programs on behalf of the minnesota zoo.

$6.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$5.9M
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 2025.

Animals$39MEnvironment$12k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $6,136,183, the rows itemized in this filing. The $6,417,847 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $281,664 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

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $34k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $220k
  • $250k+1 grant · $5.9M
$219,594
Median grant
4
States reached
$19M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MINNESOTA ZOO$5,883,089
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY$219,594
WOODLAND PARK ZOO$21,000
ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH$12,500
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 4% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%MINNESOTA ZOO: $8.0M → 6%Advanced Telemetry Systems: $7k → 7%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $246k → 28%DALLAS ZOO: $7k → 14%WORLD PARROT TRUST: $10k → 10%NORTH CAROLINA AQUARIUM SOCIETY: $5k → 8%SECORE INTERNATIONAL INC: $5k → 15%WOODLAND PARK ZOO: $21k → 9%ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH: $13k → 8%MINNESOTA ZOO: $6.1M → 6%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $220k → 28%WORLD PARROT TRUST: $7k → 10%WOODLAND PARK ZOO: $10k → 9%ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH: $8k → 8%MINNESOTA ZOO: $5.9M → 6%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $210k → 28%WOODLAND PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $9k → 9%ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH: $8k → 8%MINNESOTA ZOO: $5.3M → 6%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $204k → 28%WOODLAND PARK ZOO: $7k → 9%ZOO CONSERVATION OUREACH GROUP: $8k → 8%MINNESOTA ZOO: $4.0M → 6%Wildlife Conservation Society: $177k → 28%WOODLAND PARK ZOO: $6k → 9%MINNESOTA ZOO: $3.3M → 6%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $149k → 28%MINNESOTA ZOO: $1.9M → 6%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $142k → 28%Minnesota Zoo: $1.8M → 6%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $138k → 28%MINNESOTA ZOO: $1.2M → 6%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $136k → 28%GLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK: $15k → 6%CONSERVATION PLANNING AND SPECIALIST GROUP: $15k → 6%CONSERVATION PLANNING AND SPECIALIST GROUP: $8k → 6%GLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK: $8k → 6%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
MN
NY
OH
MD
NC
SC
TX
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$39M · 6 repeat orgs$28k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
5

Total granted

$39M
$28k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+61%
+243%

Still filing today

83%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEnvironmentOther
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

  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Society
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.6M · revenue +59%
  • WP
    WOODLAND PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY
    5× · 2020–2025 · $53k · revenue +112%
  • GC
    GLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK
    4× · 2020–2024 · $45k · revenue +45%

Funded once

  • AT
    ADVANCED TELEMETRY SYSTEMS INC
    one grant, 2017 · $7k
  • DZ
    DALLAS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $7k · revenue +222%
  • REWILDgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue +243%
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
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
3
Red River Zoological Society

As conservation leaders, the red river zoo connects our community to nature and inspires people to help save species.

Animals
4
Wildlife Protection Solutions

To protect endangered species.

Animals
5
Zoological Society of San Diego

San diego zoo wildlife alliance is committed to saving species worldwide by uniting our expertise in wildlife care and conservation science with our dedication to inspiring passion for nature.

Animals
6
Asia Wild

Asia Wild is committed to rescuing and protecting the welfare of animals worldwide. They support small, locally-focused organizations that tirelessly combat numerous issues that threaten wildlife survival, including poaching, abuse,…

Animals
7
Thompson Park Conservancy Inc

Zoo new york, by example and action, provides knowledge and motivation for conserving nature in new york state through science-based natural and cultural experiences.

Arts & Culture
8
South Carolina Aquarium

Our mission is to inspire conservation of the natural world by exhibiting and caring for animals, by excelling in education and research, and by providing an exceptional visitor experience.

Animals
9
American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums Inc

The association is an educational organization dedicated to the advancement of zoological parks and aquariums in the areas of species conservation, animal welfare, and conservation education.

Animals
10
NatureServe

NatureServe's mission is to leverage the power of science, data, and technology to guide biodiversity conservation and stewardship. We activate our mission by working with a network of 60+ partners located in states and provinces across…

Environment
11
Zoological Society of Pittsburgh

The zoological society of pittsburgh is dedicated to being a leader in, and significant contributor to, the conservation of endangered and threatened species. the society provides an enjoyable family experience that fosters understanding,…

Animals
12
Endangered Species International

Endangered Species International is strongly committed to reversing the trend of human-induced species extinction, saving endangered animals, and preserving wild places.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Woodland Park Zoological Society; the most unlike its peers is Wildlife Conservation Society. 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, 2017–2026.

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. 9 of the 11 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
9/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MINNESOTA ZOO: $37,507,055 · OtherMINNESOTA ZOO+2 more: $41,930 · OtherWildlife Conservation Society: $1,621,377 · Animals+6 more: $131,933 · AnimalsSECORE INTERNATIONAL INC: $5,000 · Environment
Other$37,548,985Animals$1,753,310Environment$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $1,621,377 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetWOODLAND PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $53,433 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBAL CONSERVATION NETWORK: $45,000 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GROUP INC: $35,000 over 4y, 3.5% of budgetWORLD PARROT TRUST USA INC: $17,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetDALLAS ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $6,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetREWILD: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSECORE INTERNATIONAL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHE NORTH CAROLINA AQUARIUM SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

American Association …Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums IncMD13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums 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 Minnesota Zoo Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Minnesota Zoo Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 11 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 Minnesota 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