Skip to content
The KM Shimano Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The KM Shimano Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$163k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$35k
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, FY2023 to 2025.

Animals$304kEnvironment$123kScience & Tech$30k
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $147k
$15,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$5.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER$35,000
MARINE MAMMALS OF MAINE$30,000
AFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND$20,000
CALIFORNIA COASTKEEPER ALLIANCE$20,000
INWATER RESEARCH GROUP$15,000
SEA TURTLE CONSERVANCY$15,000
NEW ENGLAND COASTAL WILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC$12,000
MARINE MAMMAL STRANDING CENTER$7,000
WILDLIFE RESEARCH ALLIANCE$3,835
SEA OTTER SAVVY$3,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY23–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 35% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%MERR INSTITUE INC: $11k → 10%NATIONAL MARINE LIFE CENTER: $20k → 8%NEW ENGLAND COASTAL WILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC: $12k → 8%AFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND: $20k → 8%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $35k → 8%SEA OTTER SAVVY: $3k → 12%CALIFORNIA COASTKEEPER ALLIANCE: $20k → 12%AQUARIUM OF THE PACIFIC: $35k → 14%INWATER RESEARCH GROUP: $15k → 10%SAVE THE MANATEE CLUB: $34k → 11%WILDLIFE RESEARCH ALLIANCE: $4k → 12%SEA TURLE OVERSIGHT PROTECTION INC: $2k → 13%SEA TURTLE CONSERVANCY: $15k → 19%MARINE MAMMAL STRANDING CENTER: $7k → 11%MARINE MAMMALS OF MAINE: $30k → 7%WITHIN THE WHALE: $2k → 9%NEW ENGLAND COASTAL WILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC: $10k → 8%AFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND: $19k → 8%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $35k → 8%CALIFORNIA COASTKEEPER ALLIANCE: $20k → 12%MARINE MAMMALS OF MAINE: $25k → 7%NEW ENGLAND COASTAL WILDLIFE ALLIANCE INC: $8k → 8%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $35k → 8%CALIFORNIA COASTKEEPER ALLIANCE (THE OTTER PROJECT): $20k → 12%MARINE MAMMALS OF MAINE: $20k → 7%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.
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.

63%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$289k · 5 repeat orgs$168k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +31% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
6

Total granted

$289k
$122k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
0%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $46k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
AnimalsArts & CultureScience & TechEnvironmentInternationalOther
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

  • MM
    Marine Mammals of Maine
    3× · 2023–2025 · $75k · revenue +31%
  • CC
    California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance
    2× · 2024–2025 · $40k · revenue +41%
  • NE
    NEW ENGLAND COASTAL WILDLIFE ALLIAN
    3× · 2023–2025 · $30k · revenue +52%

Funded once

  • AO
    AQUARIUM OF THE PACIFIC CORPORATION
    one grant, 2024 · $35k · revenue 0%
  • SAVE THE MANATEE CLUB INC
    one grant, 2023 · $34k · revenue +17%
  • CC
    CALIFORNIA COASTKEEPER ALLIANCE (THE OTTER PROJECT)
    one grant, 2023 · $20k
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
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
—
2
Marine Megafauna Foundation

Save threatened marine life using pioneering research, education, and sustainable conservation solutions

International
3
Worlds Aquarium

Marine Conservation

—
4
Wildcoast

The mission of wildcoast is to conserve coastal and marine ecosystems and address climate change through natural solutions. our staff is dedicated to conserving threatened and endangered coastlines and wildlife in california and mexico.…

Environment
5
California Ocean Alliance

The mission of the California Ocean Alliance is to conduct world-class marine research which leads directly to sound policy decisions that safeguard the oceans and allow marine mammals to thrive into the next century.

Science & Tech
6
Orca Conservancy

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

Animals
7
Marine Conservation Science Institute
Philanthropy
8
National Marine Mammal Foundation Inc

The nmmf's mission is to improve and protect life for marine mammals, humans, and our shared oceans through science, service, and education. our vision is to be the leading laboratory in marine mammal science, where critical questions…

Animals
9
Wild Orca

Translating science into action to save Southern Resident killer whales from extinction.

Animals
10
Ocean Alliance Inc

Scientific Research on marine mammals and education

Environment
11
Ocean Research and Educational
Science & Tech
12
The Coral Reef and Marine Science Foundation Inc C/O James Bildner
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Save the Manatee Club Inc; the most unlike its peers is Sea Otter Savvy. 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

13 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. 13 of the 17 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
6/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $105,000 · AnimalsTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTERAFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND INC: $38,700 · AnimalsAFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND INCAQUARIUM OF THE PACIFIC CORPORATION: $35,000 · AnimalsAQUARIUM OF THE PACIFIC CORPORATIONSAVE THE MANATEE CLUB INC: $34,000 · AnimalsSAVE THE MANATEE CLUB INC+3 more: $12,000 · Animals+3 moreMarine Mammals of Maine: $75,000 · Arts & CultureMarine Mammals of MaineNATIONAL MARINE LIFE CENTER INC: $20,000 · Arts & CultureNATIONAL MARINE LIFE CE…NEW ENGLAND COASTAL WILDLIFE ALLIAN: $30,000 · Science & TechNEW ENGLAND…Inwater Research Group Inc: $15,000 · Science & TechInwater Res…California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance: $40,000 · EnvironmentCaliforni…CALIFORNIA COASTKEEPER ALLIANCE (THE OTTER PROJECT): $20,000 · OtherCALIFORNI…MERR INSTITUE INC: $11,000 · OtherMERR INST…WILDLIFE RESEARCH ALLIANCE INC: $3,835 · OtherWILDLIFE …Individual grant recipient: $2,000 · OtherIndividua…Sea Turtle Conservancy: $15,000 · International
Animals$224,700Arts & Culture$95,000Science & Tech$45,000Environment$40,000Other$36,835International$15,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $105,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetMarine Mammals of Maine: $75,000 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetCalifornia Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance: $40,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetAFRICAN AQUATIC CONSERVATION FUND INC: $38,700 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetAQUARIUM OF THE PACIFIC CORPORATION: $35,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSAVE THE MANATEE CLUB INC: $34,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetNEW ENGLAND COASTAL WILDLIFE ALLIAN: $30,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetNATIONAL MARINE LIFE CENTER INC: $20,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetMarine Mammal Stranding Center: $7,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetSEA OTTER SAVVY: $3,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetSea Turtle Oversight Protection Inc: $2,000 over 1y, 4.0% 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.

PatagoniaorgPaypal Charitable Giv…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
PatagoniaorgCA13.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 The KM Shimano Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The KM Shimano Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 30%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 16%
  • African Aquatic Conservation Fund Inc: 55% of income from government
  • National Marine Life Center Inc: 16% of income from government
  • Marine Mammal Stranding Center: 10% of income from government
  • Sea Turtle Conservancy: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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 17 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 KM Shimano Family’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