· Public charity
The Abraham Foundation
The Abraham Foundation is on a mission to protect threatened animals, wild and domestic, who have no voice of their own.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2023–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 10 grants below total $197,477 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $1,873,269 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,675,792 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k4 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $68k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $110k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Wildlife Madagascar | $109,800 |
| Boscobel | $20,000 |
| Lukuru Wildlife Research F | $15,000 |
| Wild Bird Fund | $12,677 |
| Polar Bears International | $10,000 |
| Gibbon Conservancy Center | $10,000 |
| Food Bank For New York Cit | $5,000 |
| Friends of Bonobos | $5,000 |
| Fistula Foundation | $5,000 |
| Gods Love We Deliver | $5,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY23–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 77% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +7% since the first grant, against +5% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $155k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- BRBOSCOBEL RESTORATION INC2× · 2024–2025 · $40k
- WBWILD BIRD FUND INC2× · 2024–2025 · $18k · revenue +7%
- GCGibbon Conservation Center3× · 2023–2025 · $15k · revenue +8%
Funded once
- SSSARAS SANCTUARYone grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue -14%
- GWGLOBAL WILDLIFE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2024 · $3k · revenue -80%
THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INCone grant, 2024 · $2k · revenue -18%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
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…
Wildlife conservation global, inc. operates the okapi conservation project (ocp) which works in the democratic republic of the congo with the institute in congo for the conservation of nature (iccn) and local communities throughout the…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Protecting india's precious wildlife from poaching, habitat loss, and human exploitation since 1995.
To protect endangered species.
Asia Wild is committed to rescuing and protecting the welfare of animals worldwide. They support small, locally-focused organizations that tirelessly combat numerous issues that threaten wildlife survival, including poaching, abuse,…
The california wildlife center (cwc) takes responsibility for the protection of all native wildlife through rehabilitiation, education and conservation. as the los angeles area's premier wildlife medical care and rehabilitation facility,…
The San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory is dedicated to the conservation of birds and their habitats through science and outreach.
Our mission is to act to conserve threatened species and ecosystems worldwide, choosing solutions that are sustainable, based on sound science and take into account human needs.
The Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology is both a natural history collection specializing in eggs and nests of birds from around the world, and a research and education institution dedicated to bird conservation.
The institute for bird populations enables science-based conservation of species and habitats by studying the abundance, demography, and ecology of birds and other wildlife.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wild Bird Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is Boscobel Restoration Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 48% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
20 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 20 of the 21 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds Wildlife Madagascar ↗
- Who funds BOSCOBEL RESTORATION INC ↗
- Who funds WILD BIRD FUND INC ↗
- Who funds LUKURU WILDLIFE RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Gibbon Conservation Center ↗
- Who funds POLAR BEARS INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF BONOBOS ↗
- Who funds The Fistula Foundation ↗
- Who funds SARAS SANCTUARY ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK FOR NEW YORK CITY ↗
- Who funds GOD'S LOVE WE DELIVER INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds New Jersey Audubon Society ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds WILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL CRANE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SELFHELP COMMUNITY SERVICES FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF HUE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JACOB BURNS FILM CENTER INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Abraham Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- New Jersey Audubon Society — 1% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Abraham Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Abraham Foundation 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.