Skip to content

· Public charity

National Wild Turkey Federation Inc

The nwtf is dedicated to the conservation of the wild turkey and the preservation of our hunting heritage.

$3.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
63
Grants FY2024still arriving
26
States reached
$98k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$3.2MAnimals$1.6MRecreation & Sports$342kPublic Safety & Disaster$203kScience & Tech$186kCrime & Legal$144kEducation$137kYouth Development$93kOther$0
02FY2024 · 63 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 63 grants below total $1,257,916, the rows itemized in this filing. The $3,931,837 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,673,921 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 $10k21 grants · $145k
  • $10k–50k38 grants · $855k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $258k
$13,541
Median grant
26
States reached
$31M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$97,562
Individual grant recipient$57,670
OKLAHOMA DEPT OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION$52,500
OHIO DIVISION OF WILDLIFE$50,000
PHEASANTS FOREVER INC$48,622
Individual grant recipient$48,135
MICHIGAN DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES$44,676
ALABAMA CONSERVATION & NATURAL RESOURCES$42,074
TENNESSEE WILDLIFE RESOURCES AGENCY$40,950
MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVANCY INC$40,000
GA DNR LAW ENFORCEMENT$33,815
Individual grant recipient$33,000
TEXAS PARKS & WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT$30,625
THE LONGLEAF ALLIANCE$29,950
Individual grant recipient$25,511
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:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%SC HUNTERS FOR THE HUNGRY: $15k → 15%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

ID
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
OR
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
DE
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
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.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.7M · 63 repeat orgs$2.5M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +48% since the first grant, against +20% for those funded once.

63 repeat relationships: 34 still active in FY2024, 29 since wound down; 28 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

63
129

Total granted

$3.7M
$2.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+20%

Still filing today

19%
15%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $486k 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
EnvironmentEducationAnimalsRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • IN
    IOWA NATURAL HERITAGE FOUNDATION
    4× · 2017–2023 · $173k · revenue +80%
  • TL
    THE LONGLEAF ALLIANCE INC
    5× · 2017–2024 · $120k · revenue +101%
  • MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVANCY INC
    4× · 2019–2024 · $74k · revenue +164%

Funded once

  • AD
    ALABAMA DIV OF WILDLIFE & FRESHWATER
    one grant, 2018 · $63k
  • AW
    ALABAMA WILDLIFE & FRESHWATER FISHE
    one grant, 2019 · $62k
  • GD
    GEORGIA DNR WILDLIFE RESOURCES DIVISION
    one grant, 2023 · $53k
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
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
2
Montana Wildlife Federation

The montana wildlife federation is a statewide conservation organization dedicated to protecting wildlife, wildlife habitat, and public access for outdoor recreation.

Animals
3
Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund

Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.

Environment
4
Minnesota Wildlife Federation

A coalition of individuals, groups, and communities dedicated to outdoor recreation and the conservation and ethical use of minnesota's natural resources by all, for all, with all.

Environment
5
Pleasant River Wildlife Foundation

Pleasant river wildlife foundation's mission is to protect scarce, high value wildlife habitat in coastal washington county on the downeast coast of maine. our highest priority is the protection of intertidal and freshwater wetlands and…

Philanthropy
6
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
7
Natural Resources Foundation of

To protect wisconsin's lands, waters, and wildlife by providing funding, leading partnerships, and connecting all people with nature.

—
8
Georgia Conservancy Inc

To protect georgia through ecological and economic solutions for stewardship, conservation, and sustainable use of the land and its resources.

Environment
9
Washington Forest Law Center

Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.

—
10
North Dakota Natural Resources Trust
—
11
National Wildlife Federation

Unite all americans to ensure wildlife thrives in a rapidly changing world.

Animals
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mississippi Valley Conservancy Inc; the most unlike its peers is Riversedge West. 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

38 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. 38 of the 221 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
37/38
Grantees still filing
25/38
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Texas Parks & Wildlife Department: $253,205 · OtherTENNESSEE WILDLIFE RESOURCES AGENCY: $227,514 · Other+168 more: $4,897,601 · Other+168 moreIOWA NATURAL HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $172,500 · EnvironmentIOWA NATURAL …THE LONGLEAF ALLIANCE INC: $119,870 · EnvironmentTHE LONGLEAF …MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVANCY INC: $74,200 · EnvironmentMISSISSIPPI V…NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL LAND TRUST: $50,000 · EnvironmentNORTH CAROLIN…Oklahoma Prescribed Burn Association: $37,000 · EnvironmentSouthern IL Prescribed Burn Association: $25,600 · EnvironmentTHE POTOMAC CONSERVANCY INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $25,000 · EnvironmentAMERICAN RIVER CONSERVANCY: $25,000 · Environment+13 more: $169,460 · Environment+13 moreAmerican Bird Conservancy: $40,000 · AnimalsGREAT RIVER GREENING: $10,000 · AnimalsGEORGIA WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $10,000 · AnimalsAUBURN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $26,550 · EducationTHE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA FOUNDATION: $14,000 · EducationUND Alumni Association and Foundation: $10,000 · EducationS C HUNTERS AND LANDOWNERS FOR THE HUNGRY: $15,000 · Human ServicesMINNESOTA DEER HUNTERS ASSOCIATION: $10,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$5,378,320Environment$723,630Animals$60,000Education$50,550Human Services$15,000Recreation & Sports$10,000

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetIOWA NATURAL HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $172,500 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetTHE LONGLEAF ALLIANCE INC: $119,870 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $111,375 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVANCY INC: $74,200 over 4y, 4.8% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA COASTAL LAND TRUST: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOUNDATION: $49,150 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetAmerican Bird Conservancy: $40,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetOklahoma Prescribed Burn Association: $37,000 over 4y, 15% of budgetAUBURN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $26,550 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSouthern IL Prescribed Burn Association: $25,600 over 3y, 51% of budgetTHE POTOMAC CONSERVANCY INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN RIVER CONSERVANCY: $25,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetRUFFED GROUSE SOCIETY: $22,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWILDLIFE LEADERSHIP ACADEMY: $20,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetShawnee Resource Conservation & Dev: $20,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetCONSERVATION TRUST FOR NORTH CAROLINA: $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetS C HUNTERS AND LANDOWNERS FOR THE HUNGRY: $15,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetBong Naturalist Association Inc: $15,000 over 1y, 33% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA FOUNDATION: $14,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCONSERVATION FEDERATION OF MISSOURI: $13,450 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetMissouri Prairie Foundation: $12,814 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetNEBRASKA GAME AND PARKS FOUNDATION: $12,300 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMINNESOTA DEER HUNTERS ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGREAT RIVER GREENING: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUND Alumni Association and Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGEORGIA WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetGROUNDSWELL CONSERVANCY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMinnesota 4-H Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetMISSOURI CONSERVATION HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $9,930 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetKANSAS ALLIANCE FOR WETLANDS AND STREAMS INC: $8,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetRIVERSEDGE WEST: $7,966 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetTHE UNITED STATES SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE INC: $7,600 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetCOMANCHE POOL PRAIRIE RESOURCE FOUNDATION: $7,500 over 1y, 2.5% 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 IOWA NATURAL HERITAGE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE LONGLEAF ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds MISSISSIPPI VALLEY CONSERVANCY INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds CONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOUNDATION ↗

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.

National Fish and Wildlife FoundationDC32.8× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Bass Pro Shops & Cabelas Outdoor Fund · Whitetails Unlimited Inc · Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation · United States Endowment for Forestry · Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation Inc · The Conservation Fund a Nonprofit Corporation · Foundation for the Carolinas · Xcel Energy Foundation · Patagoniaorg · NRA Foundation Inc

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 National Wild Turkey Federation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from National Wild Turkey Federation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    14report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely 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 221 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 National Wild Turkey Federation’s filings →

    More from the funding graph