Skip to content
Spanish Mustang Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

Spanish Mustang Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$9k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$5k
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$162kHuman Services$4kHealth$500
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$45k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SKY MOUNTAIN WILD HORSE SANCTUARY$5,000
RETURN TO FREEDOM$2,500
BLUE RAVEN FARMS SPANISH MUSTANG FOUNDATION INC$1,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–20, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%MARBRIDGE FOUNDATION: $3k → 10%MARBRIDGE FOUNDATION: $1k → 10%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

VT
WI
WY
SD
CA
VA
AZ
NM
NC
TX
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$162k · 12 repeat orgs$5k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
6

Total granted

$162k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+253%

Still filing today

58%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsFood & NutritionHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • SM
    SPANISH MUSTANG PRESERVE INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $11k · revenue +230%
  • RT
    RETURN TO FREEDOM INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $10k · revenue +57%
  • AW
    AMERICAN WILD HORSE PRESERVATION CAMPAIGN
    6× · 2017–2024 · $5k · revenue +209%

Funded once

  • PS
    PINK SOCKS FARM LLC
    one grant, 2018 · $1k
  • SO
    SPIRIT OF THE WILD HORSE
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
  • WF
    WALK FOR THE CURE
    one grant, 2017 · $500
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
Saving America's Mustangs
Education
2
Mustangs Forever Inc
Animals
3
Blue Horse Sanctuary
Animals
4
Stormwalker Ranch Equine
Human Services
5
Windwalker Ridge Mustang Sanctuary Inc

Currently housing and caring for 84 displaced wild mustang horses

Animals
6
World Ranch Horse Association
Animals
7
Nevada Wild Horses

Wild horse protection, preservation, rescue and care work.

Animals
8
Run Wild Ranch Sanctuary

Rescued wild mustangs from slaughter and brought them to sanctuary

Animals
9
Mustangs of America Foundation

Looking after and caring for wild mustangs

Animals
10
Shepherd Mountain Horse Rescue Inc

Numerous starving or sick animal acquired fed and nourished back to good health and rehomed

Animals
11
Solitude Farm Morgan Horse Rescue
—
12
Wolfe Ranch Rescue
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sky Mountain Wild Horse Sanctuary; the most unlike its peers is Marbridge Foundation 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

10 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. 10 of the 19 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $50,258 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $45,504 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSky Mountain Wild Horse Sanctuary: $10,500 · OtherSky Mountain Wild Horse SanctuaryIndividual grant recipient: $7,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $4,516 · Other+5 more: $4,125 · OtherSPANISH MUSTANG PRESERVE INC: $10,500 · AnimalsSPANISH MUSTANG PRESERVE …RETURN TO FREEDOM INC: $9,750 · AnimalsRETURN TO FREEDOM INCCENTER FOR AMERICAS FIRST HORSE: $7,700 · AnimalsCENTER FOR AMERICAS FIRST…AMERICAN WILD HORSE PRESERVATION CAMPAIGN: $5,100 · AnimalsAMERICAN WILD HORSE PRESE…INSTITUTE OF THE RANGE & THE AMERICAN MUSTANG: $4,750 · AnimalsINSTITUTE OF THE RANGE & …+1 more: $400 · AnimalsMARBRIDGE FOUNDATION INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesGWALTNEY FRONTIER FARM INC: $2,000 · Food & NutritionMUSTANG CAMP: $500 · Education
Other$121,903Animals$38,200Human Services$4,000Food & Nutrition$2,000Education$500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSPANISH MUSTANG PRESERVE INC: $10,500 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetSky Mountain Wild Horse Sanctuary: $10,500 over 3y, 3.6% of budgetRETURN TO FREEDOM INC: $9,750 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER FOR AMERICAS FIRST HORSE: $7,700 over 4y, 3.6% of budgetAMERICAN WILD HORSE PRESERVATION CAMPAIGN: $5,100 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetINSTITUTE OF THE RANGE & THE AMERICAN MUSTANG: $4,750 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetMARBRIDGE FOUNDATION INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HORSE SHELTER: $400 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.

  • Who funds SPANISH MUSTANG PRESERVE INC ↗
  • Who funds Sky Mountain Wild Horse Sanctuary ↗
  • Who funds RETURN TO FREEDOM INC ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR AMERICAS FIRST HORSE ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN WILD HORSE PRESERVATION CAMPAIGN ↗
  • Who funds INSTITUTE OF THE RANGE & THE AMERICAN MUSTANG ↗
  • Who funds MARBRIDGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds GWALTNEY FRONTIER FARM INC ↗
  • Who funds MUSTANG CAMP ↗
  • Who funds THE HORSE SHELTER ↗

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.

Shell USA Company Fou…Morgan Stanley Global…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Shell USA Company FoundationTX11.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Shell USA Company Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Spanish Mustang Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Spanish Mustang Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s 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 · 0–20%
    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 19 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Spanish Mustang’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