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

· Public charity

Seneca Park Zoo Society

Chartered as an educational institution by new york state in 1957, the society provides education and programming & conservation, fundraising, special events, public relations and marketing, and membership to monroe county's seneca park zoo.

$283k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$277k
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$9.2MEnvironment$93k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$277,220
Median grant
1
States reached
$6.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COUNTY OF MONROE PARKS DEPARTMENT$277,220
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 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%AMERICAN FUND FOR CHARITIES CO GMA FOUNDATION: $16k → 16%OMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $7k → 12%WISE TROPICS: $21k → 7%SENECA PARK ZOO SOCIETY ZOO FUND: $84k → 14%LION LANDSCAPESEMPOWERS AFRICA: $7k → 17%INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $8k → 11%MADAGASCAR FAUNA AND FLORA GROUP: $5k → 10%GIRAFFE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE: $7k → 8%RED PANDA NETWORK: $14k → 15%SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $13k → 9%AMERICAN FUND FOR CHARITIES FBO SANCCOB: $9k → 16%WISE TROPICS INC: $6k → 7%COUNTY OF MONROE PARK DEPARTMNET: $1.9M → 14%AFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION: $10k → 17%SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $10k → 9%AMERICAN FUND FOR CHARITIES CO GMA FOUNDATION: $5k → 16%WISE TROPICS INC: $5k → 7%COUNTY OF MONROE PARKS DEPARTMENT: $1.8M → 14%SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $9k → 9%COUNTY OF MONROE: $1.7M → 14%SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $8k → 9%COUNTY OF MONROE: $1.5M → 14%SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $7k → 9%COUNTY OF MONROE PARK DEPARTMNET: $1.1M → 14%SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $7k → 9%COUNTY OF MONROE PARKS DEPARTMENT: $325k → 14%COUNTY OF MONROE PARKS DEPARTMENT: $277k → 14%COUNTY OF MONROE PARKS DEPARTMENT: $277k → 14%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

WA
MT
NY
MA
OR
NE
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.
$9.0M · 7 repeat orgs$231k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +70% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
10

Total granted

$9.0M
$231k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+70%
+14%

Still filing today

57%
70%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
AnimalsEnvironmentRecreation & SportsInternationalOther
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

  • IS
    INTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST
    6× · 2017–2023 · $53k · revenue +17%
  • PB
    POLAR BEARS INTERNATIONAL
    5× · 2017–2023 · $46k · revenue +173%
  • IE
    INTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION
    4× · 2017–2023 · $40k · revenue +70%

Funded once

  • SP
    SENECA PARK ZOO SOCIETY DEVELOPMENT FUND INC
    one grant, 2017 · $84k · revenue -91%
  • 1O
    14 OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
    one grant, 2017 · $72k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $17k
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
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
2
African Wildlife Foundation Inc

Awf's mission is to ensure wildlife and wild lands thrive in modern africa. we work to equip african governments, institutions, business, and communities with the tools, insights, and support they need to define, own, and realize a…

Animals
3
Mozparks Initiative Inc

Mozparks initiativ, inc has been established to address and defeat the onslaught on elephant, rhino, and other species of wildlife and the habitat of wildlife in mozambique. mozparks partners with non-governmental organizations, local…

—
4
Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc

The Fossey Fund is dedicated to the conservation and study of gorillas in Africa through a successful, people-centered approach: 1) Providing daily protection to gorillas, 2) Scientific research providing critical data on gorillas and…

—
5
Wildlife Sos

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

Animals
6
Wildlife Madagascar

Wildlife Madagascar is dedicated to the preservation and protection of Madagascars unique biodiversity through a multifaceted strategy and extensive collaborative efforts.

Animals
7
Rainforest Trust

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

International
8
Zambia Carnivore Programme

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

Animals
9
Wildlife Impact

Protect wildlife and ecosystems through research, evidence-based evaluation, capacity development and advocacy.

Animals
10
Global Wildlife Foundation

Funding innovative veterinary research and supporting organizations dedicated to preserving and protecting wildlife for future generations.

Animals
11
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
12
Wild Forests and Fauna

Wild forests and fauna (wildff) is a 501(c)(3) us-based non-profit organization that addresses landscape-scale conservation issues in globally important forests. we are a diverse network of science and business professionals who, together…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is African Parks Foundation of America; 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

12 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. 12 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COUNTY OF MONROE: $3,151,641 · OtherCOUNTY OF MONROECOUNTY OF MONROE PARK DEPARTMNET: $3,004,842 · OtherCOUNTY OF MONROE PARK DEPARTMNETCOUNTY OF MONROE PARKS DEPARTMENT: $2,676,285 · OtherCOUNTY OF MONROE PARKS DEPARTMENT+4 more: $125,958 · OtherSENECA PARK ZOO SOCIETY DEVELOPMENT FUND INC: $83,538 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $53,255 · AnimalsPOLAR BEARS INTERNATIONAL: $45,522 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION: $39,527 · AnimalsRED PANDA NETWORK: $14,000 · Animals+2 more: $14,995 · AnimalsWISE TROPICS INC: $32,728 · EnvironmentMADAGASCAR FAUNA AND FLORA GROUP: $5,000 · EnvironmentAFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsEMPOWERS AFRICA INC: $7,000 · International
Other$8,958,726Animals$250,837Environment$37,728Recreation & Sports$10,000International$7,000

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 budgetSENECA PARK ZOO SOCIETY DEVELOPMENT FUND INC: $83,538 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetINTERNATIONAL SNOW LEOPARD TRUST: $53,255 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetPOLAR BEARS INTERNATIONAL: $45,522 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION: $39,527 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetWISE TROPICS INC: $32,728 over 3y, 15% of budgetTHE AMERICAN FUND FOR CHARITIES: $29,750 over 3y, 2.4% of budgetRED PANDA NETWORK: $14,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetAFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION: $8,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetEMPOWERS AFRICA INC: $7,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetOMAHA ZOO FOUNDATION: $6,995 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMADAGASCAR FAUNA AND FLORA GROUP: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% 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…Gs Donor Advised Phil…American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Natl Christian Charit…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Zoological Society of San DiegoCA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Zoological Society of San Diego · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn 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 Seneca Park Zoo Society funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Seneca Park Zoo Society. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%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
    2get 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 · 0–30%
    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 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Seneca Park Zoo 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