Skip to content
Reid Park Zoological Society at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Reid Park Zoological Society

To connect people with animals, inspiring the protection of wild animals and wild places.

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
9
States reached
$1.3M
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$8.9MScience & Tech$13kEducation$12k
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 12 grants below total $1,420,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,453,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $33,000 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

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $157k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.3M
$13,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$19M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF TUCSON$1,250,000
NAPLES ZOO$30,000
LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY$30,000
ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GROUP$25,000
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY$15,000
PHOENIX ZOO$13,000
PITTSBURGH ZOO & AQUARIUM$12,000
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK$12,000
GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION$10,000
OKLAHOMA CITY ZOOLOGICAL TRUST$10,000
SAN ANTONIO ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY$7,000
INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION$6,000
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 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PHOENIX ZOO: $13k → 11%CITY OF TUCSON: $1.4M → 15%PITTSBURGH ZOO & AQUARIUM: $12k → 11%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $12k → 10%Wildlife Conservation Society: $21k → 28%INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $6k → 11%SAN ANTONIO ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $7k → 16%HOUSTON ZOO CONSERVATION: $42k → 16%OKLAHOMA CITY ZOOLOGICAL TRUST: $10k → 16%NAPLES ZOO: $30k → 10%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $10k → 13%RED PANDA NETWORK: $8k → 15%LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $30k → 14%ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GROUP: $25k → 8%CITY OF TUCSON: $1.3M → 15%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $8k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $18k → 28%OKLAHOMA CITY ZOOLOGICAL TRUST: $8k → 16%NAPLES ZOO: $27k → 10%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $8k → 13%RED PANDA NETWORK: $6k → 15%LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $26k → 14%ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GROUP: $24k → 8%CITY OF TUCSON: $689k → 15%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $8k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $15k → 28%NAPLES ZOO: $25k → 10%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $6k → 13%LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $25k → 14%Zoo Conservation Outreach Gr: $21k → 8%CITY OF TUCSON: $596k → 15%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $5k → 10%Wildlife Conservation Society: $10k → 28%LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $25k → 14%Zoo Conservation Outreach Gr: $20k → 8%City of Tucson: $262k → 15%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $8k → 28%LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $20k → 14%ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GROUP: $20k → 8%Future of Your Zoo: $110k → 15%Red Panda Network: $9k → 10%ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GR: $16k → 8%University of Arizona Foundat: $12k → 15%ZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GR: $8k → 8%U OF A FOUNDATION: $6k → 15%Association of Zoos & Aquariu: $7k → 8%City of Tucson: $2.4M → 15%City of Tucson: $1.7M → 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

IL
NY
OR
PA
CA
MD
AZ
OK
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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.8M · 10 repeat orgs$209k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
4

Total granted

$8.8M
$171k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
+83%

Still filing today

80%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $38k 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
AnimalsInternationalEducationOther
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

  • NZ
    NAPLES ZOO INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $82k · revenue +45%
  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Society
    5× · 2017–2025 · $72k · revenue +59%
  • WC
    WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC
    5× · 2020–2025 · $38k · revenue +167%

Funded once

  • FO
    Future of Your Zoo
    one grant, 2017 · $110k
  • Houston Zoo Inc
    one grant, 2021 · $42k · revenue -2%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
    one grant, 2022 · $13k
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
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
2
Zoo Outreach Organisation

Wildlife conservation, research and education.

Environment
3
Oak Creek Zoological Conservatory
Animals
4
Red River Zoological Society

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

Animals
5
San Francisco Zoological Society

To connect all people with wildlife, inspire caring for nature, and advance conservation action.

Animals
6
Racine Zoological Society Inc

The mission of the racine zoological society is to foster an enlightening and affordable wildlife experience that improves the bond between people and nature. the society will provide for the recreation and education of the people, the…

Animals
7
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
8
The Zoological Society of the Palm Beaches Inc

The zoological society of the palm beaches, inc. exists to inspire people to act on behalf of wildlife and the natural world. we advance our conservation mission through endangered species propagation, education and support of conservation…

Animals
9
Denver Zoological Foundation

Inspiring communities to save wildlife for future generations.

Animals
10
Rainforest Trust

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

International
11
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
12
Dallas Zoo Management Inc

Organization's mission to manage, operate and promote the dallas zoo on behalf of the dallas zoological society pursuant to agreement with the city of dallas, including the care and well-being of the zoo's animals and the promotion of the…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums Inc; the most unlike its peers is Red Panda Network. 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

14 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. 14 of the 18 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
9/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF TUCSON: $8,219,962 · OtherCITY OF TUCSON+4 more: $275,100 · OtherLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $125,750 · AnimalsNAPLES ZOO INC: $81,500 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation Society: $71,600 · AnimalsHouston Zoo Inc: $41,500 · AnimalsWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $38,465 · AnimalsRED PANDA NETWORK: $22,530 · Animals+5 more: $44,500 · AnimalsGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $23,500 · InternationalUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $17,600 · Education
Other$8,495,062Animals$425,845International$23,500Education$17,600

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 budgetZOO CONSERVATION OUTREACH GROUP INC: $134,100 over 7y, 7.5% of budgetLINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $125,750 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNAPLES ZOO INC: $81,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $71,600 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHouston Zoo Inc: $41,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $38,465 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA: $23,500 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetRED PANDA NETWORK: $22,530 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $17,600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetARIZONA CENTER FOR NATURE CONSERVATION: $13,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF ZOOLOGICAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS INC: $6,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $6,000 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.

Detroit Zoological So…Zoological Society of…Commonwealth Zoologic…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…The Bank of America C…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Detroit Zoological SocietyMI15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Detroit Zoological Society · Zoological Society of San Diego · Commonwealth Zoological Corporation D/B/A Zoo New England · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Reid Park Zoological Society funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Reid Park Zoological Society. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Giraffe Conservation Foundation Usa: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
3report 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 18 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 Reid Park Zoological Society’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