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

· Public charity

Sacramento Zoological Society

The sacramento zoo inspires appreciation, respect and a connection with wildlife and nature through education, recreation and conservation.

$163k
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
9
States reached
$27k
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 2024.

Animals$490kEnvironment$75k
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 12 grants below total $138,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $162,750 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $24,750 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 $10k8 grants · $53k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $85k
$7,750
Median grant
9
States reached
$27M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OKAPI CONSERVATION PROJECT$26,750
INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION$25,250
WILD NATURE INSTITUTE$22,750
SEDGWICK CO ZOO$10,250
THE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION AT SACRAMENTO STATE$8,250
MADAGASCAR FAUNA GROUP$7,750
RHODE ISLAND ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY$7,250
RED PANDA NETWORK$6,750
SNOW LEOPARD CONSERVANCY$6,750
SAINT LOUIS ZOO$5,750
CLAWS CONSERVANCY$5,250
GALAPAGOS CONSERVANCY$5,250
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 84% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CLAWS CONSERVANCY: $10k → 11%SNOW LEOPARD CONSERVANCY: $7k → 9%WCN EXPO SPONSORSHIP: $18k → 10%THE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION AT SACRAMENTO STATE: $8k → 12%TULEYOME: $11k → 16%INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $20k → 11%HOUSTON ZOO INC: $6k → 16%MADAGASCAR FAUNA GROUP: $8k → 10%OKAPI CONSERVATION PROJECT: $27k → 14%SEDGWICK CO ZOO: $10k → 16%ST LOUIS ZOO FRIENDS ASSOCIATION: $7k → 21%RED PANDA NETWORK: $16k → 15%THE SMALL WILD CAT CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $17k → 11%WILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $25k → 12%NORTH CAROLINA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $9k → 14%RHODE ISLAND ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $7k → 14%GALAPAGOS CONSERVANCY: $5k → 6%INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $25k → 12%VIRGINIA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $5k → 19%CLAWS CONSERVANCY: $7k → 11%SNOW LEOPARD CONSERVANCY: $6k → 9%PAINTED DOG RESEARCH TRUST: $14k → 10%SANDHILL CRANE: $9k → 12%TULEYOME: $6k → 16%OKAPI CONSERVATION PROJECT: $20k → 14%SEDGWICK COUNTY ZOO: $10k → 16%SAINT LOUIS ZOO: $6k → 21%RED PANDA NETWORK: $7k → 15%WILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $23k → 12%CLAWS CONSERVANCY: $5k → 11%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $8k → 10%TULEYOME: $5k → 16%OKAPI CONSERVATION PROJECT: $17k → 14%SEDGWICK COUNTY ZOO: $6k → 16%RED PANDA NETWORK: $6k → 15%WILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $17k → 12%CLAWS CONSERVANCY: $5k → 11%WCN EXPO SPONSORSHIP: $8k → 10%OKAPI CONSERVATION PROJECT: $13k → 14%SEDGWICK COUNTY ZOO: $5k → 16%RED PANDA NETWORK: $5k → 15%WILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $11k → 12%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK: $8k → 10%OKAPI CONSERVATION PROJECT: $12k → 14%RED PANDA NETWORK: $5k → 15%WILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $11k → 12%WILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $10k → 12%WILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $7k → 12%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

MA
OR
CT
RI
CA
MO
VA
KS
NC
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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$457k · 11 repeat orgs$86k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
7

Total granted

$457k
$57k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+70%

Still filing today

91%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $29k 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
AnimalsEducationEnvironmentOther
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

  • WN
    WILD NATURE INSTITUTE
    7× · 2018–2024 · $104k · revenue +43%
  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Global Inc
    6× · 2018–2024 · $94k · revenue +40%
  • WC
    WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC
    4× · 2017–2022 · $59k · revenue +302%

Funded once

  • SW
    SMALL WILD CAT CONSERVATION FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $17k · revenue ×15
  • NORTH CAROLINA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $9k · revenue +121%
  • SO
    SAVE OUR SANDHILL CRANES
    one grant, 2017 · $9k
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
Red River Zoological Society

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

Animals
2
Wildlife Protection Solutions

To protect endangered species.

Animals
3
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
4
Wildlife Sos

Protecting india's precious wildlife from poaching, habitat loss, and human exploitation since 1995.

Animals
5
Rainforest Trust

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

International
6
Zoo Conservation Outreach Group Inc

To support wildlife and habitat conservation in the americas.

—
7
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
8
San Francisco Zoological Society

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

Animals
9
Cheyenne Mountain Zoological Society

The cheyenne mountain zoological society owns and operates the cheyenne mountain zoo. a leader in conservation, captive breeding and animal care, the zoo connects people with wildlife and wild places through experiences that inspire…

Animals
10
Sri Lanka Wild Life Conservation Society

The Sri Lanka Wild Life Conservation Society was set-up to help protect and conserve the diminishing of Sri Lanka and to make the local and international community aware of it's endangered status. It is dedicated to the conservation and…

Environment
11
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
12
Zambia Carnivore Programme

To safeguard large carnivores, their prey, and habitat in zambia through applied research, conservation, and education.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Carolina Zoological Society 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

21 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. 21 of the 23 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
16/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $104,275 · AnimalsWILD NATURE INSTITUTEWildlife Conservation Global Inc: $93,550 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation Global IncWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $59,350 · AnimalsWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INCTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $45,125 · AnimalsTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATIONRED PANDA NETWORK: $44,122 · AnimalsRED PANDA NETWORKCommunities Living Among Wildlife Sustainably Conservancy: $26,770 · AnimalsCommunities Living Among Wildlife Sustainably ConservancySEDGWICK COUNTY ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $26,275 · AnimalsMountain Lion Foundation: $17,868 · AnimalsSMALL WILD CAT CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $16,800 · Animals+8 more: $64,110 · Animals+8 moreUS FOREST SERVICE: $14,800 · OtherSAVE OUR SANDHILL CRANES: $8,750 · OtherGALAPAGOS CONSERVANCY INC: $5,250 · OtherNETWORK FOR GOOD: $21,244 · Public Safety & DisasterTHE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION AT SACRAMENTO STATE: $8,250 · EducationMADAGASCAR FAUNA AND FLORA GROUP: $7,750 · Environment
Animals$498,245Other$28,800Public Safety & Disaster$21,244Education$8,250Environment$7,750

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 budgetWILD NATURE INSTITUTE: $104,275 over 7y, 11% of budgetWildlife Conservation Global Inc: $93,550 over 6y, 2.6% of budgetWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $59,350 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $45,125 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetRED PANDA NETWORK: $44,122 over 6y, 2.0% of budgetCommunities Living Among Wildlife Sustainably Conservancy: $26,770 over 4y, 4.9% of budgetSEDGWICK COUNTY ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $26,275 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNETWORK FOR GOOD: $21,244 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMountain Lion Foundation: $17,868 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetTHE SAINT LOUIS ZOO ASSOCIATION: $12,750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSnow Leopard Conservancy: $12,250 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC: $9,310 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION AT SACRAMENTO STATE: $8,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMADAGASCAR FAUNA AND FLORA GROUP: $7,750 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetRHODE ISLAND ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $7,250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHouston Zoo Inc: $6,400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGALAPAGOS CONSERVANCY INC: $5,250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSEDGWICK COUNTY ZOOLOGICAL FOUNDATION: $5,150 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetVIRGINIA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Zoological Society of…The Pfizer Foundation…American Endowment Fo…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Zoological Society of CincinnatiOH13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Zoological Society of Cincinnati · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Sacramento Zoological Society funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sacramento Zoological Society. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    4get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 23 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 Sacramento 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