Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Panthera Corporation

Panthera's mission is the conservation of the world's 40 wild cat species, many of which are endangered or threatened.

$2.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$155k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202024.

Environment$923kAnimals$690k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 3 grants below total $183,726 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,142,009 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,958,283 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $23k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $155k
$23,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$20M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FISHING CAT CONSERVATION ALLIANCE$155,363
CONSERVATION SCIENCE PARTNERS INC$23,000
CHEETAH CONSERVATION FUND$5,363
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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 86% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PHOENIX ZOO: $9k → 11%FISHING CAT CONSERVANCY INC: $8k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO: $12k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA: $44k → 9%FOUNDANT TECHNOLOGIES: $8k → 10%US FOREST SERVICE: $11k → 10%CONSERVATION SCIENCE PARTNERS INC: $23k → 11%UC SANTA CRUZ FOUNDATION: $17k → 13%PEOPLE RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $6k → 14%SOUTH FORK NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM: $25k → 7%UNIVERSITY OF OXFORDWILDCRU: $556k → 17%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $30k → 28%FISHING CAT CONSERVATION ALLIANCE: $155k → 16%YALE SCHOOL OF THE ENVIRONMENT YALE UNIVERSITY: $18k → 12%HOME RANGE WILDLIFE RESEARCH: $10k → 17%QUINAULT INDIAN NATION: $62k → 18%WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION: $8k → 19%ERIN PHILLIPS: $10k → 11%CHEETAH CONSERVATION FUND: $5k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO: $6k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA: $40k → 9%SOUTH FORK NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM: $25k → 7%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $23k → 28%FISHING CAT CONSERVATION ALLIANCE: $150k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA: $34k → 9%FISHING CAT CONSERVATION ALLIANCE: $150k → 16%FISHING CAT CONSERVATION ALLIANCE: $150k → 16%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

WA
ID
MT
NY
PA
NJ
CT
CA
CO
WV
VA
AZ
TX

Grants abroad, by region — $3.8M on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 6 regions, $1.9M to organizations and $1.9M to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Cat Conservation Grants$1.9M · 50% · 20 people
Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$660k · 18% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: FIELD CONSERVATION

South Asia$606k · 16% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: FIELD CONSERVATION

Sub-Saharan Africa$424k · 11% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: FIELD CONSERVATION

Russia and Neighboring States$184k · 5% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: FIELD CONSERVATION

East Asia and the Pacific$6k · 0% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: FIELD CONSERVATION

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. 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.

53%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$843k · 5 repeat orgs$752k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +35% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.

5 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
13

Total granted

$843k
$723k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+9%

Still filing today

60%
54%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EducationAnimalsEnvironmentScience & TechOther

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

  • FC
    FISHING CAT CONSERVATION ALLIANCE
    4× · 2021–2024 · $605k
  • TU
    THE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION
    3× · 2021–2023 · $117k · revenue -20%
  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Society
    2× · 2020–2021 · $53k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • AF
    AMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC
    one grant, 2021 · $556k · revenue +21%
  • QI
    QUINAULT INDIAN NATION
    one grant, 2023 · $62k
  • US
    UC SANTA CRUZ FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $17k · revenue -17%

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
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
2
Rainforest Trust

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

International
3
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
4
Marine Biological Laboratory

The Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL) is a world-renowned center for biological discovery and training that is notably affiliated with more than 60 Nobel Prize winners. Research is conducted by full-time faculty as well as hundreds of the…

Science & Tech
5
American Museum of Natural History

The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."

Arts & Culture
6
Int'l Union for Conservation of Nature & Natural Resources - Us

Iucn-us fund builds bridges between us donors and iucn by catalyzing, accelerating, funding and promoting iucn's work - conserving nature and natural resources in the united states and throughout the world.

Environment
7
Adventurers and Scientists for Conservation

we ensure the availability of critical field data that accelerates conservation and climate solutions. we achieve our mission by mobilizing and training outdoor enthusiasts and local communities to collect high-quality scientific data that…

Environment
8
California Wildlife Foundation

The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species

Animals
9
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
10
The Penn State Research Foundation

The Penn State Research Foundations mission is to foster and advance scientific research which includes creating, purchasing, holding and licensing of rights for inventions, designs and intellectual property of The Pennsylvania State…

Education
11
Wrld Foundation

WRLD Foundation's mission is to support scientific projects, awareness-raising efforts, educational programs, and other charitable undertakings. Through grant-making and fiscal sponsorships, WRLD Foundation supports nonprofit organizations…

Environment
12
Conserve Wildlife Foundation of New Jersey Inc

Conserve wildlife foundation of new jersey works to preserve rare and at-risk wildlife in new jersey through field science, habitat restoration, education, and public engagement.

Animals

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The University of Montana Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Princeton University Mem Fund Tr Uw Mary S. 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

13 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. 13 of the 21 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
7/13
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

FISHING CAT CONSERVATION ALLIANCE — $605,363 · OtherFISHING CAT CONSERVATION ALLIANCEQUINAULT INDIAN NATION — $62,485 · OtherQUINAULT INDIAN NATION+6 more — $67,004 · Other+6 moreAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC — $555,681 · EducationAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INCTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION — $117,146 · EducationTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION+4 more — $52,915 · Education+4 moreWildlife Conservation Society — $52,500 · AnimalsHome Range Wildlife Research — $10,000 · AnimalsREWILD — $5,500 · AnimalsCheetah Conservation Fund — $5,363 · AnimalsSOUTH FORK NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY — $50,000 · EnvironmentPEOPLE RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION FOUNDATION — $6,000 · EnvironmentConservation Science Partners Inc — $23,000 · Science & Tech
Other$734,852Education$725,742Animals$73,363Environment$56,000Science & Tech$23,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC — $555,681 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION — $117,146 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society — $52,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTH FORK NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY — $50,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetConservation Science Partners Inc — $23,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetYale University — $18,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUC SANTA CRUZ FOUNDATION — $16,915 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHome Range Wildlife Research — $10,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetPRINCETON UNIVERSITY MEM FUND TR UW MARY S — $10,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CORPORATION — $8,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPEOPLE RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION FOUNDATION — $6,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetREWILD — $5,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCheetah Conservation Fund — $5,363 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA1.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Panthera Corporation 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 12%
  • Yale University12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get 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 · 0–90%
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.

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 21 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph