· Private foundation
The Margot Marsh Biodiversity 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k16 grants · $299k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $150k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| REWILD | $150,000 |
| GORILLA REHABILITATION AND CONSERVATION EDUCATION | $25,000 |
| REWILD | $25,000 |
| REWILD | $25,000 |
| FRIENDS OF BONOBOS | $25,000 |
| CLOUD FOREST FUND | $25,000 |
| FAUNA & FLORA INTERNATIONAL | $20,000 |
| LINCOLN PARK ZOO | $20,000 |
| GORILLA REHABILITATION AND CONSERVATION EDUCATION | $20,000 |
| WILD EARTH ALLIES | $20,000 |
| BONOBO CONSERVATION INITIATIVE | $20,000 |
| OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY | $15,700 |
| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS URBANA CHAMPAIGN | $15,000 |
| REWILD | $12,000 |
| NEW NATURE FOUNDATION | $11,200 |
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 64% 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 37% of The Margot Marsh Biodiversity Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 6% of the giving stays in NY; read by stated purpose it is 1% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +39% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
28 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 5 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, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $76k 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
REWILD9× · 2017–2025 · $1.6M · revenue +550%- GRGORILLA REHABILITATION CONSERVATION EDUCATION (GRACE) CENTER INC5× · 2021–2025 · $193k · revenue +21%
- WEWild Earth Allies Inc9× · 2017–2025 · $185k · revenue +102%
Funded once
- GGRACEone grant, 2021 · $25k
- GGRACEone grant, 2024 · $25k
- STSAVE THE GOLDEN LION TAMARINone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -16%
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
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…
Panthera's mission is the conservation of the world's 40 wild cat species, many of which are endangered or threatened. panthera develops, implements and oversees wild cat conservation strategies on a global scale.
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.
Protect wildlife and ecosystems through research, evidence-based evaluation, capacity development and advocacy.
Endangered Species International is strongly committed to reversing the trend of human-induced species extinction, saving endangered animals, and preserving wild places.
Dazzle africa's mission is to partner with local organizations to provide programs in conservation, education and community development. the organization aims to ensure that future generations are self-sufficient and iconic african…
Natura International conserves rainforests and other key natural ecosystems and the endangered species they contain through creation of protected areas in collaboration with local governments and communities in Latin America. In this way…
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
Conservation of natural resources
To safeguard large carnivores, their prey, and habitat in zambia through applied research, conservation, and education.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jane Goodall Institute for Wildlife Research Education and Conservation and the most unlike its peers is Drexel University. 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 34 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
38 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. 38 of the 73 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 REWILD ↗
- Who funds GORILLA REHABILITATION CONSERVATION EDUCATION (GRACE) CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Wild Earth Allies Inc ↗
- Who funds FAUNA & FLORA INTERNATIONAL USA INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF BONOBOS ↗
- Who funds LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BONOBO CONSERVATION INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds THE NEW NATURE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL PRIMATOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds OMAHA ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION FUSION INC ↗
- Who funds ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF CINCINNATI ↗
- Who funds Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc ↗
- Who funds SEACOLOGY ↗
- Who funds Houston Zoo Inc ↗
- Who funds KASIISI PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE GOLDEN LION TAMARIN ↗
- Who funds DENVER ZOOLOGICAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Trustees of Princeton University ↗
- Who funds JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION ↗
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: Columbus Zoological Park Association · Arcus Foundation · Seaworld & Busch Gardens Conservation Fund · National Geographic Society · Globalgiving Foundation Inc · AbbVie Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc
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 Margot Marsh Biodiversity 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Pan African Sanctuary Alliance Inc — 68% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% 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 Margot Marsh Biodiversity Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Margot Marsh Biodiversity 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.