Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Warren Wildlife Gallery

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$14k
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Education$106kEnvironment$51kAnimals$50kYouth Development$41kCommunity Improvement$6kScience & Tech$5kFood & Nutrition$2kRecreation & Sports$500Other$0
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$2,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KIDS OUTDOOR ZONE$5,000
CAPITAL AREA COUNCIL$4,500
ATX KIDS CLUB$2,000
LAKE TRAVIS FFA ALUMNI ASSOCIATION$1,500
ROUND ROCK BASEBALL LEAGUE$500
CPATH$103
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY19–24, $33k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%KIDS OUTDOOR ZONE: $23k → 10%KIDS OUTDOOR ZONE: $5k → 10%THE KIDS OUTDOOR ZONE: $5k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

27%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$71k · 4 repeat orgs$189k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
14

Total granted

$71k
$185k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+59%
+66%

Still filing today

75%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationEnvironmentAnimalsHuman ServicesPhilanthropyYouth DevelopmentOther

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

  • TK
    THE KIDS OUTDOORS ZONE INC
    3× · 2019–2024 · $33k · revenue +72%
  • PARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS
    2× · 2018–2022 · $29k · revenue +6%
  • YL
    YOUNG LIFE
    4× · 2017–2020 · $4k · revenue +59%

Funded once

  • TT
    Tau Trustees Educational Foundation Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue -86% · 70% of their budget
  • CF
    CONSERVATION FORCE LION AGING IN TANZANIA
    one grant, 2021 · $20k
  • CF
    CONSERVATION FORCE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue -26%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
2
Caesar Kleberg Foundation for Wildlife Conservation
3
Texas Prairieland Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Foundation for Tx Wildlife

The texas wildlife association foundation, inc(twaf) increases natural resource literacy and promotes conservation and educational programs that connect texans to the land.

Animals
5
Ducks Unlimited Inc Group Return

Ducks unlimited, inc. conserves, restores, and manages wetlands and associated habitats for north america's waterfowl. these habitats also benefit additional wildlife and people.

Environment
6
Interlaken Wildlife Foundation
Animals
7
Coastal Prairie Conservancy

The Coastal Prairie Conservancy (CPC) works to sustain a resilient Texas by preserving coastal prairies, wetlands, farms, and ranches to benefit people and wildlife forever. Continued on Schedule OCPC conserves land, restores and enhances…

Environment
8
Texas Foundation for Conservation

Fish and wildlife conservation and outreach including public awareness. Fifteen public relations campaign on social media with over 7.5 million impressions. Twenty plus speaking engagements to a variety of conservation organizations…

Animals
9
Mzuri Wildlife Foundation

Mzuri wildlife foundation is dedicated to promoting wildlife conservation and educating and encouraging the next generation of outdoor sports enthusiasts with an emphasis on women and youth.

Animals
10
International Wildlife Trust

Iwt is committed to combatting both the causes and effects of illegal wildlife trafficking by focusing on transnational organized crime groups who have escaped the consequences of their criminal activities to date.

Animals
11
Conservation Farms & Ranches

Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.

Housing & Shelter
12
Tennessee Wildlife Federation Foundation Inc

To administer funds for the use and benefit of the tennessee wildlife federation.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Parks and Wildlife Foundation of Texas and the most unlike its peers is Banovich Wildscapes Foundation. 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

12 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 22 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
6/12
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Tau Trustees Educational Foundation Inc — $100,000 · OtherTau Trustees Educational Foundation IncCONSERVATION FORCE LION AGING IN TANZANIA — $20,000 · OtherCONSERVATION FORCE LION AGING IN TANZANIAOUTDOORS TOMORROW FOUNDATION — $10,000 · OtherOUTDOORS TOMORROW FOUNDATIONCAPITAL AREA COUNCIL — $5,500 · Other+9 more — $19,903 · Other+9 moreTHE KIDS OUTDOORS ZONE INC — $33,400 · Human ServicesTHE KIDS OUTDO…PARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS — $28,700 · EnvironmentPARKS AND WIL…Ducks Unlimited Inc — $2,500 · EnvironmentDucks Unlimit…CONSERVATION FORCE INC — $20,000 · AnimalsCONSERVATI…THE IVAN CARTER WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE INC — $5,000 · AnimalsTHE IVAN C…Texas A&M Foundation — $5,000 · EducationATX KIDS CLUB — $2,000 · EducationBANOVICH WILDSCAPES FOUNDATION — $5,000 · PhilanthropyYOUNG LIFE — $3,850 · Youth Development
Other$155,403Human Services$33,400Environment$31,200Animals$25,000Education$7,000Philanthropy$5,000Youth Development$3,850

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTau Trustees Educational Foundation Inc — $100,000 over 1y, 70% of budgetTHE KIDS OUTDOORS ZONE INC — $33,400 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetPARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS — $28,700 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCONSERVATION FORCE INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetBANOVICH WILDSCAPES FOUNDATION — $5,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetTexas A&M Foundation — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE IVAN CARTER WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetYOUNG LIFE — $3,850 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetDucks Unlimited Inc — $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetATX KIDS CLUB — $2,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetROUND ROCK BASEBALL LEAGUE — $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCPATH CEREBRAL PALSY AWARENESS TRANSITION HOPE — $103 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA3.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Warren Wildlife Gallery 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Warren Wildlife Gallery?

    Find your warmest path to Warren Wildlife Gallery 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 22 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph