Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Wildlife Conservation Network Inc

Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.

$46M
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$897k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
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 FY2017–2025.

Environment$20MAnimals$17MEducation$2.6MHousing & Shelter$1.5MRecreation & Sports$562kInternational$538kPublic Benefit$225kCrime & Legal$34k
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 17 grants below total $5,736,448 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $45,772,264 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $40,035,816 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 $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $48k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+7 grants · $4.3M
$238,402
Median grant
6
States reached
$98M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE HONEY LAKE VALLEY RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT$896,621
UNIVERSITY OF CA DAVIS$773,300
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$720,527
THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT FOUNDATION$600,000
RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT OF THE SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS$500,000
GREENBELT ALLIANCE PEOPLE FOR OPEN SPACE INC$468,937
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC$375,000
JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE$245,966
GREEN FOOTHILLS FOUNDATION$238,402
SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS RESEARCH FOUNDATION$225,000
MONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION$200,000
CONSERVATION SCIENCE PARTNERS INC$176,325
UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING FOUNDATION$170,000
WILD EARTH SOCIETY INC$90,485
LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY$38,000
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 (FY25–25, $225k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $225k → 13%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.

Which US states your grants reach

VT
WA
MT
NY
WY
OH
CA
UT
CO
MO
VA
MD
AZ
DC
TX
FL

Grants abroad, by region — $40M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 8 regions, $39M to organizations and $477k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$31M · 78% · 1 grant · 43 people

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT · EDUCATIONAL SCHOLARSHIP · EARLY CAREER SUPPORT

South America$4.1M · 10% · 1 grant · 27 people

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT · EDUCATIONAL SCHOLARSHIP · INTERNSHIP SUPPORT

East Asia and the Pacific$2.0M · 5% · 1 grant · 3 people

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT · EDUCATIONAL SCHOLARSHIP · EARLY CAREER SUPPORT

South Asia$1.1M · 3% · 1 grant · 5 people

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT · EDUCATIONAL SCHOLARSHIP · INTERNSHIP SUPPORT

Central America and the Caribbean$1.1M · 3% · 1 grant · 1 person

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT · INTERNSHIP SUPPORT

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$227k · 1% · 1 grant · 19 people

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT · EDUCATIONAL SCHOLARSHIP · EARLY CAREER SUPPORT

Russia and Neighboring States$189k · 0% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GENERAL SUPPORT

North America (Canada and Mexico)$2k · 0% · 1 person

Stated purpose: EDUCATIONAL SCHOLARSHIP

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$33M · 31 repeat orgs$7.7M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +47% since the first grant, against +28% for the ones you funded once.

31 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 22 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

31
22

Total granted

$33M
$5.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+28%

Still filing today

90%
77%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.6M 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
AnimalsEnvironmentInternationalEducationHousing & ShelterHealthOther

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

  • THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND
    3× · 2021–2024 · $5.8M · revenue +109%
  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Society
    4× · 2017–2020 · $5.2M · revenue +59%
  • JG
    JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION
    7× · 2017–2025 · $2.6M · revenue +50%

Funded once

  • WC
    WILDLIFE CROSSING FUND
    one grant, 2024 · $1.0M
  • THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
    one grant, 2024 · $1.0M · revenue 0%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY HABITAT AGENCY
    one grant, 2022 · $1.0M · revenue -100%

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
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
African Wildlife Foundation Inc

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…

Animals
3
Endangered Species International

Endangered Species International is strongly committed to reversing the trend of human-induced species extinction, saving endangered animals, and preserving wild places.

Animals
4
Wildlife Alliance Inc

Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…

Animals
5
Defenders of Wildlife

Defenders of Wildlife is a national, nonprofit membership organization dedicated to the protection of all native animals and plants in their natural communities.

Animals
6
Wildlife Impact

Protect wildlife and ecosystems through research, evidence-based evaluation, capacity development and advocacy.

Animals
7
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

—
8
Natura Bolivia Foundation

The Natura Bolivia Foundation is dedicated to implementing, and evaluating the impact of conservation and development programs, with a focus on watershed conservation, protected areas, and incentive based conservation in Bolivia. We work…

International
9
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
10
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
11
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
12
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wildaid Inc and the most unlike its peers is Liberty Asia (Us) Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyAffordable Housing Developm…Policy Research and AdvocacyCommunity College Foundatio…Animal Rescue and ShelterEnvironmental Conservation …Community Foundations
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 25 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%6%<5yr15%9%5–10yr20%23%10–20yr17%21%20–35yr11%21%35–55yr13%19%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%5%<5yr15%9%5–10yr20%15%10–20yr17%14%20–35yr11%31%35–55yr13%27%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
2%1/61
the rest of the field
14%
26,002/186,917

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.

04the grantee network

52 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. 52 of the 61 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.

11
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
16
Early backer (in before they grew)
51/52
Grantees still filing
39/52
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Wildlife Conservation Society — $5,246,253 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation SocietyJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION — $2,630,811 · AnimalsJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH ED…FRANKFURT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY - US INC — $2,498,320 · AnimalsFRANKFURT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY - US INCPANTHERA CORPORATION — $1,891,107 · AnimalsPANTHERA CORPORATIONWILDAID INC — $1,409,985 · AnimalsWILDAID INCSMALL WILD CAT CONSERVATION FOUNDATION — $618,585 · Animals+16 more — $3,296,210 · Animals+16 moreTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND — $5,830,000 · EnvironmentTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LANDGREENBELT ALLIANCEPEOPLE FOR OPEN SPACE — $1,181,263 · EnvironmentGREENBELT ALLIANCEPEOPLE FOR O…THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION — $1,000,000 · EnvironmentTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPRO…FRIENDS OF THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY HABITAT AGENCY — $1,000,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE SANTA CLARA VAL…THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT FOUNDATION — $600,000 · EnvironmentAmah Mutsun Land Trust — $500,000 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC — $415,322 · Environment+9 more — $723,910 · Environment+9 moreUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS — $1,825,050 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA …THE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $1,598,149 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYWILDLIFE CROSSING FUND — $1,000,000 · OtherWILDLIFE CROSSING FUNDTHE HONEY LAKE VALLEY RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT — $896,621 · OtherTHE HONEY LAKE VALLEY RES…ENVIRONMENT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST — $838,000 · OtherENVIRONMENT IN THE PUBLIC…Green Foothills Foundation dba Green Foothills — $624,093 · OtherGreen Foothills Foundatio…INTERNATIONAL WILDERNESS LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION INC — $577,517 · OtherINTERNATIONAL WILDERNESS …MOUNTAINS RECREATION & CONSERVATION AUTHORITY — $505,280 · OtherMOUNTAINS RECREATION & CO…SANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS RCD — $500,000 · OtherSANTA MONICA MOUNTAINS RC…+8 more — $983,659 · Other+8 moreCalifornia YIMBY Education Fund — $1,540,367 · Housing & ShelterWild Earth Society Incorporated — $1,139,194 · Arts & CultureMARALLIANCE — $786,645 · InternationalGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA — $149,399 · InternationalUNIVERSITY OF WYOMING FOUNDATION — $393,000 · EducationFLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC — $38,700 · Education
Animals$17,591,271Environment$11,250,495Other$9,348,369Housing & Shelter$1,540,367Arts & Culture$1,139,194International$936,044Education$431,700

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 budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND — $5,830,000 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society — $5,246,253 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION — $2,630,811 over 7y, 5.4% of budgetFRANKFURT ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY - US INC — $2,498,320 over 3y, 15% of budgetPANTHERA CORPORATION — $1,891,107 over 5y, 2.8% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $1,598,149 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCalifornia YIMBY Education Fund — $1,540,367 over 2y, 21% of budgetWILDAID INC — $1,409,985 over 4y, 11% of budgetGREENBELT ALLIANCEPEOPLE FOR OPEN SPACE — $1,181,263 over 2y, 25% of budgetWild Earth Society Incorporated — $1,139,194 over 3y, 18% of budgetTHE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION — $1,000,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMARALLIANCE — $786,645 over 4y, 35% of budgetGreen Foothills Foundation dba Green Foothills — $624,093 over 3y, 19% of budgetSMALL WILD CAT CONSERVATION FOUNDATION — $618,585 over 4y, 87% of budgetINTERNATIONAL WILDERNESS LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION INC — $577,517 over 4y, 7.0% of budgetWildlife Conservation Global Inc — $539,260 over 4y, 34% of budgetAmah Mutsun Land Trust — $500,000 over 1y, 8.3% of budgetENDANGERED HABITATS LEAGUE — $456,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC — $415,322 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC — $395,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WYOMING FOUNDATION — $393,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetSnow Leopard Conservancy — $360,919 over 4y, 16% of budgetCheetah Conservation Fund — $322,096 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetREWILD — $250,036 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetSUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS RESEARCH FOUNDATION — $225,000 over 1y, 63% of budgetLAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY — $195,350 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetKOPELION INC — $179,959 over 2y, 81% of budgetThe Chaparral Lands Conservancy — $171,658 over 1y, 38% of budgetWild Horizons Wildlife Orphanage and Sanctuary — $170,351 over 2y, 35% of budgetGIRAFFE CONSERVATION FOUNDATION USA — $149,399 over 4y, 7.4% of budgetCHENGETA WILDLIFE — $144,822 over 1y, 26% of budgetWorking Dogs For Conservation Found — $124,000 over 6y, 2.3% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC — $115,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetECO ACTIVISTS FOR GOVERNANCE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT — $100,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetSAVE THE RHINO INTERNATIONAL INC — $100,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetMALIASILI INITIATIVES INC — $85,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetSOUTH COAST WILDLANDS — $51,745 over 2y, 38% of budgetPLANET INDONESIA — $50,000 over 1y, 7.9% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL RHINO FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetLiberty Asia (US) Inc — $45,300 over 1y, 31% of budgetFLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC — $38,700 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetALLIANCE TO COUNTER CRIME ONLINE — $34,186 over 1y, 16% of budgetAUDUBON CANYON RANCH INC — $30,218 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPOLAR BEARS INTERNATIONAL — $9,907 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetHouston Zoo Inc — $7,860 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION — $5,890 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.

Resources Legacy FundThe Woodtiger FundThe Nature ConservancyNational Geographic S…Community Foundation …Gordon E and Betty I …Silicon Valley Commun…PatagoniaorgNational Fish and Wil…The Trust for Public …The Pew Charitable Tr…The David and Lucile …
Resources Legacy FundCA21.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Resources Legacy Fund · The Woodtiger Fund · The Nature Conservancy · National Geographic Society · Community Foundation Santa Cruz County · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Patagoniaorg · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Trust for Public Land · The Pew Charitable Trusts · The David and Lucile Packard 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 Wildlife Conservation Network Inc 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Giraffe Conservation Foundation Usa — 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
13report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

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 61 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines