Skip to content
The Pat Palmer Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Pat Palmer Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$495k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$76k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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$3.4MEnvironment$86k
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $236k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $251k
$40,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$7.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEXAS A & M FOR VET MED FOR BRIGHTSMITH RELEASE WORK$76,000
PARROT RESCUE CENTER COSTA RICA$65,000
AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY FOR LEAR'S MACAW$60,000
FLIGHT CLUB FOUNDATION$50,000
PROJECT PERRY$40,000
AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY FOR BLUE THROATED MACAWS$40,000
FOSTER PARROTS$40,000
WOMEN FOR CONSERVATION$35,000
OASIS SANCTUARY$25,000
WINGS OF LOVE BIRD HAVEN$25,000
MIDWEST AVIAN ADOPTION & RESCUE$16,000
BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SANCTUARY$15,000
TEXAS A & M FOR VET MED FOR BRIGHTSMITH ABV RESEARCH$7,500
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 80% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%FOSTER PARROTS: $60k → 8%BIRD HAVEN: $30k → 9%TEXAS A&M VETERINARY PATHOBIOLGY DEPT: $76k → 22%LUCKY PARROT: $25k → 10%PARROT RESCUE CENTER COSTA RICA: $70k → 8%FOSTER PARROT: $65k → 7%BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $25k → 9%AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY FOR LEAR'S MACAW: $60k → 6%PROJECT PERRY: $60k → 11%FOSTER PARROTS: $50k → 8%WINGS OF LOVE BIRD HAVEN INC: $30k → 9%TEXAS A & M FOR VET MED FOR BRIGHTSMITH RELEASE WORK: $76k → 22%PARROT RESCUE CENTER COSTA RICA: $65k → 8%FOSTER PARROTS: $65k → 7%BEST FRIENDS SANCTUARY PARROT GARDEN: $25k → 9%FLIGHT CLUB FOUNDATION: $50k → 9%AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY FOR BLUE THROATED MACAWS: $60k → 6%PROJECT PERRY INC: $50k → 11%FOSTER PARROTS: $50k → 8%WINGS OF LOVE BIRD HAVEN: $25k → 9%TEXAS A & M FOR VET MED FOR BRIGHTSMITH ABV RESEARCH: $60k → 22%PARROT RESCUE CENTER OF COSTA RICA: $51k → 8%FOSTER PARROT: $60k → 7%BEST FRIENDS SANCTUARY PARROT GARDEN: $25k → 9%SEATTLE PARROT FESTIVAL: $40k → 9%AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY: $40k → 6%PROJECT PERRY: $50k → 11%SCHUBOT EXOTIC BIRD HEALTH CENTER: $50k → 22%LUCKY PARROT SANCTUARY: $25k → 10%PARROT RESCUE CENTER OF COSTA RICA: $50k → 8%FOSTER PARROT: $45k → 7%FLIGHT CLUB FOUNDATION: $28k → 9%AMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY FOR BLUE THROATED MACAWS: $40k → 6%PROJECT PERRY: $50k → 11%SCHUBOT EXOTIC BIRD HEALTH CENTER: $50k → 22%FOSTER PARROT: $40k → 7%FLIGHT CLUB FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%PROJECT PERRY: $50k → 11%TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $50k → 22%FOSTER PARROTS: $40k → 7%SEATTLE FLIGHT CLUB: $25k → 9%PROJECT PERRY INC: $45k → 11%SCHUBOT EXOTIC BIRD HEALTH CENTER: $50k → 22%PROJECT PERRY INC: $40k → 11%TEXAS A&M: $40k → 22%PROJECT PERRY: $40k → 11%SCHUBOT EXOTIC BIRD HEALTH CENTER: $65k → 22%SCHUBOT EXOTIC BIRD HEALTH CENTER: $50k → 22%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
MN
MA
RI
CA
UT
VA
AZ
TN
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.3M · 26 repeat orgs$195k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +109% since the first grant, against +24% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
8

Total granted

$3.3M
$195k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+109%
+24%

Still filing today

31%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEnvironmentOther
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

  • OS
    OASIS SANCTUARY FOUNDATION LTD
    9× · 2017–2025 · $455k · revenue +109%
  • PP
    PROJECT PERRY INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $385k · revenue +537%
  • FP
    FOSTER PARROTS LTD
    3× · 2017–2019 · $160k · revenue +374%

Funded once

  • TA
    TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2018 · $50k
  • TA
    TEXAS A&M
    one grant, 2020 · $40k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $40k
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
Parrots in Paradise
Animals
2
Global Nest Exotic Bird Sanctuary
Animals
3
Warbler Woods Bird Sanctuary
Animals
4
Burge Bird Rescue

Pet bird rescue and adoption

Education
5
Parrot Rescue Center

Rescue, Rehabilitation, and permanent care of parrots.

Animals
6
Bird Gardens of Naples Inc

Animal rescue

Animals
7
Sarasota Parrot Conservatory

Is a parrot rescue and sanctuary

Animals
8
Exotic Bird Rescue of Oregon

Our mission is to find a safe, loving home for every bird, and to provide education and support to our community. To take in unwanted, abandoned, injured or lost exotic birds. To provide medical care and safe housing for rescued exotic…

Animals
9
Feathered Sanctuary Exotic Bird Rescue Inc

Rescue, rehabilitate and re-home companion birds. educate the general public as well as current owners on these companion birds. help inform owners on the intelligence and sensitive nature of these birds.

Animals
10
Northeast Avian Rescue Inc

Animal Shelter Parrots and exotic pet birds

Unclassified
11
Melbourne Avian Rescue Sanctuary

Parrot rescue and rehabilitation

Animals
12
Forever Wild Wildlife Rescue
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Foster Parrots Ltd; the most unlike its peers is Women for Conservation. 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

9 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. 9 of the 34 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SCHUBOT EXOTIC BIRD HEALTH CENTER: $264,500 · OtherSCHUBOT EXOTIC BIRD HEALTH CENTERIndividual grant recipient: $210,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientGULF COAST EXOTIC BIRD SANCTUARY: $173,000 · OtherGULF COAST EXOTIC BIRD SANCTUARYPARROT RESCUE CENTER OF COSTA RICA: $137,000 · OtherPARROT RESCUE CENTER OF COSTA RICAPARROT RESCUE CENTER COSTA RICA: $135,000 · OtherPARROT RESCUE CENTER COSTA RICAFOSTER PARROTS: $105,000 · OtherAMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY FOR BLUE THROATED MACAWS: $100,000 · OtherTEXAS A & M FOR VET MED FOR BRIGHTSMITH RELEASE WORK: $96,000 · OtherBEST FRIENDS SANCTUARY PARROT GARDEN: $85,000 · OtherTEXAS A&M VETERINARY PATHOBIOLGY DEPT: $81,000 · OtherAMERICAN BIRD CONSERVANCY FOR LEAR'S MACAW: $80,000 · OtherMIDWEST AVIAN ADOPTION AND RESCUE: $79,000 · Other+13 more: $498,500 · Other+13 moreOASIS SANCTUARY FOUNDATION LTD: $455,000 · AnimalsOASIS SANCTUARY FOUNDATION LTDPROJECT PERRY INC: $385,000 · AnimalsPROJECT PERRY INCFOSTER PARROTS LTD: $160,000 · AnimalsFOSTER PARROTS LTDFLIGHT CLUB FOUNDATION: $123,000 · AnimalsFLIGHT CLUB FOUNDATIONWINGS OF LOVE BIRD HAVEN INC: $112,000 · AnimalsWINGS OF LOVE BIRD HAVEN INCBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $75,000 · AnimalsBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETYAmerican Bird Conservancy: $71,500 · Animals+1 more: $10,000 · AnimalsWOMEN FOR CONSERVATION: $86,300 · Environment
Other$2,044,000Animals$1,391,500Environment$86,300

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 budgetOASIS SANCTUARY FOUNDATION LTD: $455,000 over 9y, 4.7% of budgetPROJECT PERRY INC: $385,000 over 8y, 20% of budgetFOSTER PARROTS LTD: $160,000 over 3y, 9.2% of budgetFLIGHT CLUB FOUNDATION: $123,000 over 4y, 24% of budgetWINGS OF LOVE BIRD HAVEN INC: $112,000 over 5y, 27% of budgetWOMEN FOR CONSERVATION: $86,300 over 3y, 8.8% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $75,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Bird Conservancy: $71,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetMIDWEST AVIAN ADOPTION & RESCUE SERVICES: $10,000 over 1y, 11% 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 OASIS SANCTUARY FOUNDATION LTD ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT PERRY INC ↗
  • Who funds FOSTER PARROTS LTD ↗
  • Who funds FLIGHT CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WINGS OF LOVE BIRD HAVEN INC ↗
  • Who funds WOMEN FOR CONSERVATION ↗
  • Who funds BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds American Bird Conservancy ↗
  • Who funds MIDWEST AVIAN ADOPTION & RESCUE SERVICES ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Pat Palmer Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Pat Palmer Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–60%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Pat Palmer Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to The Pat Palmer Foundation Inc 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.

    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 34 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 Pat Palmer’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