Skip to content
Seaworld & Busch Gardens Conservation Fund at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Seaworld & Busch Gardens Conservation Fund

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$1.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$500k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0191% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Animals$3.7MEnvironment$2.1MScience & Tech$1.0MEducation$445kInternational$370kArts & Culture$65kRecreation & Sports$60kCommunity Improvement$43kOther$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $123k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $665k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.1M
$50,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$2.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HUBBS SEAWORLD RESEARCH INSTITUTION$500,000
OCEARCH$349,730
WORLD VETS$300,000
AFRICAN MARINE MAMMEL CONSEREVATION$180,000
THE MARINE MAMMEL CENTER$160,000
AMPA FRIENDS OF THE MANATEE ASSOCIA$75,000
ICAS WILD ANIMAL CONSSEREVATION INS$50,000
ASOCIATION PANAMERICANA PARA LA CON$50,000
SANCCOB SO AFRICAN FOUNDATION FOR T$50,000
UGANDA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION$50,000
WILDERNESS FOUNDATION AFRICA$50,000
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII$30,000
Individual grant recipient$28,000
TUSK TRUST$20,000
THE BIG CAT SANCTUARY$20,000
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.

US giving: 70% of grant dollars ($6.1M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 30% that went abroad ($2.6M) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 44% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%TUSK TRUST: $20k → 8%WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTIO: $300k → 8%Friends of Bonobos: $20k → 11%PAINTED DOG CONSERVATION: $20k → 10%Fundacion Proyecto Titi: $28k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII: $30k → 9%National Audubon Society Inc: $120k → 16%Wildlife Alliance: $40k → 17%TExas Marine Mammel Stranding: $23k → 14%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND: $20k → 14%HUBBS SEAWORLD RESEARCH INSTITUTION: $500k → 10%AUDUBON CENTER FOR BIRDS OF PREY: $20k → 13%Coral Restoration Foundation Inc: $20k → 13%AUDUBON FLORIDA: $100k → 15%Endangered Wolf Center: $20k → 11%Pan African Sanctuary Alliance: $38k → 12%OCEARCH: $350k → 5%Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund: $20k → 13%WORLD VETS: $350k → 9%Seward Association for the Advance: $31k → 11%ALASKA DEPT FISH AND GAME: $20k → 21%UGANDA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $50k → 7%Living Lands Waters: $50k → 15%RESTORE AMERICAS ESTUARIES: $30k → 7%CHEETAH CONSEERVATION FUND: $20k → 9%INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $20k → 12%WILD EARTH ALLIES: $30k → 8%Cetacean Action Treasury: $27k → 9%WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTIO: $150k → 8%THE MARINE MAMMEL CENTER: $200k → 8%Painted Dog Conservation: $20k → 10%AUDUBON FLORIDA: $50k → 16%Hubbs SeaWorld Research Institute: $149k → 10%National Audubon Society: $50k → 15%SR3 Sealife Response Rahabilitation: $25k → 9%WORLD VETS: $300k → 9%UGANDA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $50k → 7%LIVING LANDS AND WATERS: $25k → 15%Restore Americas Estuaries Galvesto: $25k → 7%Woods Hole Oceanographic Institutio: $150k → 8%THE MARINE MAMMEL CENTER: $160k → 8%HAWAII PACIFIC UNIVERSITY: $25k → 9%National Audubon Society: $25k → 16%Uganda Conservation Foundation: $26k → 7%Woods Hole Oceanographic Institutio: $150k → 8%African Wildlife Foundation: $25k → 14%WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTIO: $150k → 8%California Wolf Center: $35k → 11%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

AK
ME
WA
ID
MT
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
IN
OH
PA
CT
CA
UT
MO
VA
MD
AZ
NC
DC
HI
LA
GA
TX
FL

Beyond the US: 30% of all-years giving ($2.6M)

22 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
South Africa$776k · 24 grants
Brazil$392k · 15 grants
Panama$300k · 11 grants
Saudi Arabia$224k · 12 grants
Uganda$206k · 8 grants
United Kingdom$149k · 9 grants
Norway$143k · 6 grants
Canada$110k · 4 grants
Indonesia$49k · 4 grants
Mexico$40k · 2 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.9M · 56 repeat orgs$2.8M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +98% since the first grant, against +62% for those funded once.

56 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2024, 44 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

56
125

Total granted

$5.9M
$1.9M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+98%
+62%

Still filing today

50%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $905k 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
AnimalsEnvironmentScience & TechEducationOther
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

  • WH
    WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION
    4× · 2017–2022 · $905k · revenue +68%
  • WV
    WORLD VETS
    2× · 2023–2024 · $650k · revenue +82% · 38% of their budget
  • TM
    THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER
    3× · 2019–2024 · $375k · revenue +22%

Funded once

  • RT
    Rising Tide
    one grant, 2021 · $121k
  • UO
    University of Florida Board of Trus
    one grant, 2019 · $100k
  • LL
    Living Lands Waters
    one grant, 2017 · $50k
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 International Foundation

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

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
Galapagos Whale Shark Project
—
4
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
—
5
Wildlife Conservation Society

The wildlife conservation society (wcs) saves wildlife and wild places worldwide through science, conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature.

Animals
6
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
7
The Coral Reef and Marine Science Foundation Inc C/O James Bildner
—
8
Worlds Aquarium

Marine Conservation

—
9
International Primate Protection League

Protecting the world's remaining primates by monitoring and exposing illegal trade, supporting a worldwide network of overseas sanctuaries and ngo's, publicising the plight of abused primates, and operating a sanctuary for resued gibbons.

Animals
10
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
11
Clean Reefs
Environment
12
Orca Conservancy

Orca conservancy is working on behalf of orcinus orca, the killer whale, and protecting the wild places on which it depends.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wildlife Conservation Network Inc; the most unlike its peers is Blue World Research Institute Inc. 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

57 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. 57 of the 187 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)
26
Early backer (in before they grew)
55/57
Grantees still filing
46/57
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HUBBS SEAWORLD RESEARCH INSTITUTION: $500,000 · OtherHUBBS SEAWORLD RESEARCH INSTITUTIONAFRICAN MARINE MAMMEL CONSEREVATION: $330,000 · OtherAFRICAN MARINE MAMMEL CONSEREVATIONUNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA: $235,000 · OtherWILDERNESS FOUNDATION AFRICA: $225,000 · OtherUGANDA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $191,000 · Other+131 more: $3,149,454 · Other+131 moreWORLD VETS: $650,000 · AnimalsWORLD VETSTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $375,000 · AnimalsTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTEROCEARCH: $349,730 · AnimalsOCEARCHHUBBS-SEA WORLD RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $172,570 · AnimalsHUBBS-SEA WORLD RESEARCH INST…+24 more: $709,940 · Animals+24 moreWOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION: $905,000 · Science & TechWOODS HOLE O…TEXAS MARINE MAMMAL STRANDING NETWORK: $46,834 · Science & Tech+2 more: $15,000 · Science & TechNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $215,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL A…RESTORE AMERICA'S ESTUARIES: $171,000 · EnvironmentRESTORE AM…Wild Earth Allies Inc: $84,000 · EnvironmentWild Earth…THE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC: $55,000 · EnvironmentTHE CORAL …TAMPA BAY WATCH INC: $45,000 · EnvironmentTAMPA BAY …LIVING LANDS & WATERS: $45,000 · EnvironmentLIVING LAN…The Ocean Foundation: $34,000 · EnvironmentLIVING COAST DISCOVERY CENTER: $27,000 · Environment+8 more: $92,000 · Environment+8 moreHAWAII PACIFIC UNIVERSITY: $25,000 · EducationFLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 · EducationDUKE UNIVERSITY: $15,000 · Education
Other$4,630,454Animals$2,257,240Science & Tech$966,834Environment$768,000Education$55,000

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 budgetWOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION: $905,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetWORLD VETS: $650,000 over 2y, 38% of budgetTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $375,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetOCEARCH: $349,730 over 1y, 32% of budgetNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $215,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHUBBS-SEA WORLD RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $172,570 over 3y, 3.2% of budgetRESTORE AMERICA'S ESTUARIES: $171,000 over 4y, 2.9% of budgetPAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INC: $71,940 over 3y, 5.7% of budgetWILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC: $70,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetCALIFORNIA WOLF CENTER: $60,000 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetTHE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC: $55,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetDian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc: $55,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetWHITE OAK CONSERVATION FOUNDATION INC: $52,000 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetPOLAR BEARS INTERNATIONAL: $51,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetOwl's Nest Sanctuary for Wildlife Inc: $50,000 over 5y, 13% of budgetTEXAS MARINE MAMMAL STRANDING NETWORK: $46,834 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetTAMPA BAY WATCH INC: $45,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $40,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF BONOBOS: $36,000 over 2y, 3.4% of budgetSAN DIEGO HUMANE SOCIETY AND SPCA: $35,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $35,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCheetah Conservation Fund: $35,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetThe Ocean Foundation: $34,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetSEWARD ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF MARINE SCIENCE: $31,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGunung Palung Orangutan Conservation Program Inc: $30,000 over 2y, 7.1% of budgetLIVING COAST DISCOVERY CENTER: $27,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetSR3 Sealife Response Rehabilitation and Research: $25,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetHAWAII PACIFIC UNIVERSITY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL: $20,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetLewa Wildlife Conservancy USA: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetFLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDUKE UNIVERSITY: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Elizabeth River Project: $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BIRD RESCUE: $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSECORE INTERNATIONAL INC: $12,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetPaso Pacifico: $12,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetBLUE WORLD RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetCONSORTIUM FOR OCEAN LEADERSHIP: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWILDCOAST: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNAPLES ZOO INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCLINIC FOR THE REHABILITATION OF WILDLIFE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLemur Conservation Foundation Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCENTER FOR COASTAL STUDIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFELIDAE CONSERVATION FUND: $4,000 over 1y, 1.4% 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 WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC INSTITUTION ↗
  • Who funds WORLD VETS ↗
  • Who funds THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds OCEARCH ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds HUBBS-SEA WORLD RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds RESTORE AMERICA'S ESTUARIES ↗
  • Who funds Wild Earth Allies Inc ↗
  • Who funds PAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds WILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA WOLF CENTER ↗
  • Who funds THE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc ↗
  • Who funds WHITE OAK CONSERVATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds POLAR BEARS INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds Owl's Nest Sanctuary for Wildlife Inc ↗
  • Who funds TEXAS MARINE MAMMAL STRANDING NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds TAMPA BAY WATCH INC ↗

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 Wil…National Geographic S…The Margot Marsh Biod…Columbus Zoological P…American Association …The David and Lucile …Globalgiving Foundati…Arcus FoundationBuilders Vision Found…PatagoniaorgGs Donor Advised Phil…Shell USA Company Fou…
National Fish and Wildlife FoundationDC18.5× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · National Geographic Society · The Margot Marsh Biodiversity Foundation · Columbus Zoological Park Association · American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums Inc · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Globalgiving Foundation Inc · Arcus Foundation · Builders Vision Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Shell USA Company 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 Seaworld & Busch Gardens Conservation Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Seaworld & Busch Gardens Conservation Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 63%
  • Blue World Research Institute Inc: 85% of income from government
  • Pan African Sanctuary Alliance Inc: 68% of income from government
  • Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution: 63% of income from government
  • Gunung Palung Orangutan Conservation Program Inc: 27% of income from government
  • Center for Coastal Studies Inc: 26% of income from government
  • The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc: 16% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
3rely 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Seaworld & Busch Gardens Conservation Fund?

Find your warmest path to Seaworld & Busch Gardens Conservation Fund through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 187 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-PF 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 Seaworld & Busch Gardens Conservation’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