Skip to content
Wildlife Support Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Wildlife Support Charitable Trust

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.

$1.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$1.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Education$1.4MAnimals$1.1MHuman Services$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $60k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.0M
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$5.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$1,000,000
Oregon State University Foundation$60,000
SNOWDON WILDLIFE SANCTUARY INC$10,000
ROWENA WILDLIFE CLINIC$10,000
CHINTIMINI WILDLIFE CENTER$10,000
WOLF HOLLOW WILDLIFE REHABILITATION CENT$10,000
BADGER RUN WILDLIFE REHAB$10,000
WEST SOUND WILDLIFE SHELTER$7,000
WHATCOM HUMANE SOCIETY$7,000
Guide Dogs of America$2,000
SAVING GRACE INC$1,000
OLDDOG HAVEN$1,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–25, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Guide Dogs of America: $5k → 14%Guide Dogs of America: $5k → 14%Guide Dogs of America: $2k → 14%Guide Dogs of America: $2k → 14%International Guiding Eyes Inc: $2k → 14%Guide Dogs of America: $2k → 14%Guide Dogs of America: $2k → 14%International Guiding Eyes Inc: $1k → 14%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.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.5M · 25 repeat orgs$1.0M to everyone else

25 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
1

Total granted

$1.5M
$2k

Still filing today

72%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 11% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.0M went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEducationYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesOther
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

  • Oregon State University Foundation
    7× · 2019–2025 · $390k · revenue +38%
  • SW
    SARVEY WILDLIFE CARE CENTER
    7× · 2018–2024 · $222k · revenue +147%
  • CHINTIMINI WILDLIFE CENTER
    8× · 2018–2025 · $81k · revenue +172%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $2k
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
Wild Souls Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation
Animals
2
West Wildlife Rehab

Rescue & Rehab orphaned and injured wild

Animals
3
Forever Wild Wildlife Rescue
Animals
4
Wet Mountain Wildlife Rehabilitatio
—
5
Maine Wildlife Rehabilitation

To support native wildlife, population research, and environmental education through several specific aims: Provide rehabilitation and high quality medical care to individual animals adversely impacted by human development and changing…

Animals
6
Kane Area Rehabilitation & Education for Wildlife

Wildlife rehabilitation

Animals
7
Rescuing Ocala Wildlife Inc

Wildlife rehabilitation in Central Florida

Animals
8
Mountain Tails Wildlife Rehab

Wildlife rehabitation

Animals
9
Wildlife Rehabilitation Clinic

To rescue orphaned and injured wildlife

Animals
10
Centre Wildlife Care

Licensed organization dedicated to caring for injured, orphaned, sick and displaced wildlife for the purpose of releasing them back into the wild.

Animals
11
Carolina Wildlife Rehabilitation Center

Our organizations main purpose is the rehabilitation of injured/orphaned wildlife.

Environment
12
Wildlife Sanctuary of Northwest Florida Inc

To provide a safe haven for injured and orphaned wildlife, provide rehabilitation and release, when possible, and to foster public awareness and appreciation of wildlife.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Wildlife Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Oregon State University 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

19 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. 19 of the 27 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
14/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $1,000,000 · EducationWASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIONOregon State University Foundation: $390,000 · EducationOregon State University FoundationSARVEY WILDLIFE CARE CENTER: $222,000 · AnimalsSARVEY WILDLIFE CARE CENTERCHINTIMINI WILDLIFE CENTER: $81,000 · AnimalsCHINTIMINI WILDLIFE CENTERROWENA WILDLIFE CLINIC: $77,000 · AnimalsROWENA WILDLIFE CLINICCASCADES RAPTOR CENTER: $76,000 · AnimalsCASCADES RAPTOR CENTERWest Sound Wildlife Shelter: $58,000 · AnimalsWest Sound Wildlife ShelterBADGER RUN WILDLIFE REHAB: $53,000 · AnimalsBADGER RUN WILDLIFE REHABIDAHO BLACK BEAR REHAB INC: $51,000 · AnimalsIDAHO BLACK BEAR REHAB INCSNOWDON WILDLIFE SANCTUARY: $40,000 · AnimalsSNOWDON WILDLIFE SANCTUARYWOLF HOLLOW WILDLIFE REHABILITATION CENTRE: $39,000 · AnimalsWOLF HOLLOW WILDLIFE REHABILITAT…WHATCOM HUMANE SOCIETY: $28,000 · Animals+1 more: $3,000 · AnimalsBlue Mountain Wildlife: $76,000 · OtherBlue Mountain W…UMPQUA WILDLIFE RESCUE: $71,000 · OtherUMPQUA WILDLIFE…AMERICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $42,000 · OtherAMERICAN WILDLI…TURTLE RIDGE WILD LIFE CENTER: $37,000 · OtherTURTLE RIDGE WI…Individual grant recipient: $27,000 · OtherIndividual gran…WHATCOM COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY: $27,000 · OtherWHATCOM COUNTY …MYSTIC FARM WILDLIFE RESCUE: $27,000 · OtherMYSTIC FARM WIL…JUNEAU RAPTOR CENTER: $20,000 · OtherJUNEAU RAPTOR C…MYSTIC FARM WILDLIFE AND CONSULTING INC: $12,000 · Other+3 more: $15,000 · OtherAmerican Heritage Wildlife Foundation Inc: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentInternational Guiding Eyes Inc DBA Guide Dogs of America: $21,000 · Human Services
Education$1,390,000Animals$728,000Other$354,000Youth Development$25,000Human Services$21,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $1,000,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetOregon State University Foundation: $390,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetSARVEY WILDLIFE CARE CENTER: $222,000 over 7y, 4.3% of budgetCHINTIMINI WILDLIFE CENTER: $81,000 over 8y, 2.6% of budgetROWENA WILDLIFE CLINIC: $77,000 over 8y, 9.0% of budgetCASCADES RAPTOR CENTER: $76,000 over 6y, 1.9% of budgetBlue Mountain Wildlife: $76,000 over 7y, 5.3% of budgetWest Sound Wildlife Shelter: $58,000 over 8y, 1.5% of budgetBADGER RUN WILDLIFE REHAB: $53,000 over 8y, 12% of budgetIDAHO BLACK BEAR REHAB INC: $51,000 over 7y, 14% of budgetAMERICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $42,000 over 7y, 13% of budgetSNOWDON WILDLIFE SANCTUARY: $40,000 over 7y, 14% of budgetWOLF HOLLOW WILDLIFE REHABILITATION CENTRE: $39,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetTURTLE RIDGE WILD LIFE CENTER: $37,000 over 4y, 18% of budgetWHATCOM HUMANE SOCIETY: $28,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican Heritage Wildlife Foundation Inc: $25,000 over 5y, 7.0% of budgetInternational Guiding Eyes Inc DBA Guide Dogs of America: $21,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetJUNEAU RAPTOR CENTER: $20,000 over 4y, 11% of budgetOLD DOG HAVEN: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Oregon State University Foundation ↗
  • Who funds SARVEY WILDLIFE CARE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds CHINTIMINI WILDLIFE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ROWENA WILDLIFE CLINIC ↗
  • Who funds CASCADES RAPTOR CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Blue Mountain Wildlife ↗
  • Who funds West Sound Wildlife Shelter ↗
  • Who funds BADGER RUN WILDLIFE REHAB ↗
  • Who funds IDAHO BLACK BEAR REHAB INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SNOWDON WILDLIFE SANCTUARY ↗
  • Who funds WOLF HOLLOW WILDLIFE REHABILITATION CENTRE ↗
  • Who funds TURTLE RIDGE WILD LIFE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds WHATCOM HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds American Heritage Wildlife Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds International Guiding Eyes Inc DBA Guide Dogs of America ↗
  • Who funds JUNEAU RAPTOR CENTER ↗
  • Who funds OLD DOG HAVEN ↗

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.

The Kinsman FoundationPuget Sound Energy Fo…Mightycause Charitabl…Shell USA Company Fou…Paypal Charitable Giv…American Online Givin…Morgan Stanley Global…Network for GoodDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Kinsman FoundationOR19.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Kinsman Foundation · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · 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 Wildlife Support Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wildlife Support Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 70%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Oregon State University Foundation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
7get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
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 27 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 Wildlife Support’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