Skip to content
Animal Charity Evaluators at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Animal Charity Evaluators

Our mission is to find and promote the most effective ways to help animals.

$4.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
21
Grants FY2025still arriving
12
States reached
$319k
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$8.5MFood & Nutrition$3.5MHuman Services$585kEnvironment$376kEducation$243kCivil Rights$187kArts & Culture$123kPhilanthropy$105kOther$0
02FY2025 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 21 grants below total $2,131,780, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,648,786 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,517,006 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k7 grants · $191k
  • $50k–250k11 grants · $1.1M
  • $250k+3 grants · $877k
$52,560
Median grant
12
States reached
$5.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE HUMANE LEAGUE$319,077
WILD ANIMAL INITIATIVE INC$307,664
FAUNALYTICS$250,726
NEW ROOTS INSTITUTE$205,697
AQUATIC LIFE INSTITUTE INC$204,544
LEGAL IMPACT FOR CHICKENS$171,019
GOOD FOOD WORLD FOUNDATION$102,654
A WELL-FED WORLD$66,000
PROVEG INTERNATIONAL INC$55,000
PLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND$55,000
KARUNA FOUNDATION$52,560
THE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE$51,259
ANIMAL ADVOCACY AFRICA$50,000
PRO-ANIMAL FUTURE$50,000
FISH WELFARE INITIATIVE$48,780
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 (FY17–24, $545k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 94% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%THE POLLINATION PROJECT FDN: $35k → 10%RETHINK PRIORITIES: $35k → 10%COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING: $74k → 14%RETHINK PRIORITIES: $45k → 10%COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING: $97k → 17%COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING USA: $45k → 14%COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING: $89k → 17%COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING USA: $36k → 14%COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING: $55k → 17%COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING-USA: $7k → 14%COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING: $27k → 17%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

ME
NH
WA
MN
IL
NY
MA
OR
IN
PA
CA
UT
CO
MO
VA
MD
DE
AZ
NC
DC
OK
GA
FL

Grants abroad, by region: $2.5M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 5 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$2.2M · 89% · 12 grants

Stated purpose: SUPPORT MISSION

East Asia and the Pacific$95k · 4% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: SUPPORT MISSION

South America$94k · 4% · 4 grants

Stated purpose: SUPPORT MISSION

North America (Canada and Mexico)$50k · 2% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: SUPPORT MISSION

Sub-Saharan Africa$45k · 2% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: SUPPORT MISSION

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. 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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 90% of Animal Charity Evaluators’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 19% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 1%.

Animal Charity Evaluatorslessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$12M · 30 repeat orgs$1.7M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +37% since the first grant, against +6% for those funded once.

30 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

30
42

Total granted

$12M
$1.2M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
+6%

Still filing today

87%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $519k 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
AnimalsFood & NutritionEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • TH
    THE HUMANE LEAGUE
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.4M · revenue +213%
  • TG
    THE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $1.8M · revenue +432%
  • WA
    WILD ANIMAL INITIATIVE INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +247%

Funded once

  • HA
    HUMANE AMERICA ANIMAL FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $63k · revenue +100%
  • SM
    SENTIENT MEDIAgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $60k · revenue +235%
  • MI
    Meridian Institutegraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $60k · revenue +176%
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
Animal Alliance Asia

Our mission is to build and mobilize a community of local animal justice and vegan advocates across Asia to create waves of impactful actions for a better world for farmed animals.

Animals
2
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
3
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
4
Institute for Animal Happiness

Growing respect and acceptance for veganism through our dedicated work of rescue and creative care, impactful vegan food programs, vibrant education, and consistent advocacy; all strengthened by our engagement with a rising global network…

Animals
5
A Greener World

A Greener World empowers sustainable solutions in agriculture, promoting and supporting real-life farming models to the public and offering farmers and ranchers practical guidance, resources and support on achieving truly sustainable…

Food & Nutrition
6
Animal & Vegan Advocacy International Inc

Animal and Vegan Advocacy International, Inc. is dedicated to creating a world in which animals are removed from the food system and other human uses. It furthers this mission by convening advocates through an international conference…

Animals
7
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
8
Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy Inc
Philanthropy
9
Animal Protection and Rescue League Inc

Exposing and eliminating animal cruelty.

Animals
10
Humane Farm Animal Care

Every farmer and rancher participating in the Certified Humane program had to modify their operations to meet the Animal Care Standards and be certified. Schedule O

Animals
11
Pax Fauna

Pax fauna exists to design a more effective social movement for animal freedom in the u.s., using original research as well as careful study of social movement literature and the recent history of the animal movement, in order to reverse…

Animals
12
Impossible Foundation
Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Animal Outlook Inc; the most unlike its peers is Lewis & Clark College. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

67 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. 67 of the 83 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
20
Early backer (in before they grew)
63/67
Grantees still filing
42/67
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE HUMANE LEAGUE: $2,397,150 · AnimalsTHE HUMANE LEAGUEWILD ANIMAL INITIATIVE INC: $1,385,834 · AnimalsWILD ANIMAL INITIATIVE INCAnimal Equality: $575,236 · AnimalsAnimal EqualityDHARMA VOICES FOR ANIMALS: $348,402 · AnimalsFISH WELFARE INITIATIVE: $342,017 · AnimalsMERCY FOR ANIMALS INC: $331,302 · AnimalsLEGAL IMPACT FOR CHICKENS: $289,636 · Animals+18 more: $967,332 · Animals+18 moreFAUNALYTICS: $1,170,612 · OtherFAUNALYTICSNEW HARVEST INC: $404,102 · OtherNEW HARVEST INCVOX MEDIA LLC: $385,187 · OtherVOX MEDIA LLCEncompass Inc: $145,000 · OtherGOOD FOOD WORLD FOUNDATION INC: $102,654 · Other+25 more: $712,158 · Other+25 moreTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $1,784,624 · Food & NutritionTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUT…New Roots Institute: $390,045 · Food & NutritionNew Roots InstituteA Well-Fed World: $266,000 · Food & NutritionA Well-Fed WorldFood Empowerment Project: $110,000 · Food & Nutrition+6 more: $233,112 · Food & Nutrition+6 moreCompassion in World Farming Inc: $430,100 · Human ServicesRethink Priorities: $80,000 · Human ServicesTHE POLLINATION PROJECT FOUNDATION: $35,000 · Human ServicesLEWIS & CLARK COLLEGE: $90,000 · EducationTrustees of Tufts College: $50,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $43,435 · EducationPeace Advocacy Network: $40,000 · EducationEmerging Markets Investors Alliance Inc: $30,000 · EducationPLANTPURE COMMUNITIES INC: $30,000 · EducationFordham University: $26,700 · EducationNew York University: $25,000 · EducationClaremont Graduate University: $21,280 · EducationOCCIDENTAL COLLEGE: $18,382 · EducationMATERIAL INNOVATION INSTITUTE: $267,526 · EnvironmentPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC: $105,000 · PhilanthropyMeridian Institute: $60,000 · PhilanthropyGo Vegan World Inc: $30,000 · PhilanthropyThe Animal House Jamaica Limited: $10,000 · Philanthropy
Animals$6,636,909Other$2,919,713Food & Nutrition$2,783,781Human Services$545,100Education$374,797Environment$267,526Philanthropy$205,000

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 budgetTHE HUMANE LEAGUE: $2,397,150 over 9y, 4.6% of budgetTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $1,784,624 over 8y, 7.6% of budgetWILD ANIMAL INITIATIVE INC: $1,385,834 over 7y, 25% of budgetFAUNALYTICS: $1,170,612 over 9y, 23% of budgetAnimal Equality: $575,236 over 5y, 16% of budgetCompassion in World Farming Inc: $430,100 over 8y, 7.2% of budgetNEW HARVEST INC: $404,102 over 3y, 15% of budgetNew Roots Institute: $390,045 over 5y, 5.9% of budgetDHARMA VOICES FOR ANIMALS: $348,402 over 6y, 19% of budgetFISH WELFARE INITIATIVE: $342,017 over 3y, 34% of budgetMERCY FOR ANIMALS INC: $331,302 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetLEGAL IMPACT FOR CHICKENS: $289,636 over 2y, 6.2% of budgetMATERIAL INNOVATION INSTITUTE: $267,526 over 4y, 24% of budgetA Well-Fed World: $266,000 over 5y, 3.9% of budgetEncompass Inc: $145,000 over 3y, 26% of budgetKaruna Foundation: $112,560 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetA JUST WORLD: $111,000 over 3y, 17% of budgetFood Empowerment Project: $110,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC: $105,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetLEWIS & CLARK COLLEGE: $90,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRethink Priorities: $80,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetACTASIA INC: $68,500 over 2y, 19% of budgetHUMANE AMERICA ANIMAL FOUNDATION: $63,232 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetVEGAN OUTREACH INC: $61,872 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetRETHINK YOUR FOOD INC: $60,000 over 4y, 12% of budgetSENTIENT MEDIA: $60,000 over 1y, 9.0% of budgetMeridian Institute: $60,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNonhuman Rights Project Inc: $57,544 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetANIMAL ADVOCACY AFRICA: $50,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetTrustees of Tufts College: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEED STRATEGIES FOR ETHICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT INC: $44,000 over 2y, 21% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $43,435 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPeace Advocacy Network: $40,000 over 2y, 30% of budgetCOMPASSIONATE ACTION FOR ANIMALS: $40,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetTHE POLLINATION PROJECT FOUNDATION: $35,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetHumane World for Animals Inc: $34,872 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetANTHROPOCENE ALLIANCE: $31,000 over 1y, 42% of budgetEmerging Markets Investors Alliance Inc: $30,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetBLACK VEGETARIAN SOCIETY OF MARYLAND: $30,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetPLANTPURE COMMUNITIES INC: $30,000 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetGo Vegan World Inc: $30,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetANIMAL OUTLOOK INC: $30,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetFordham University: $26,700 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNew York University: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetClaremont Graduate University: $21,280 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNorthwest Veg: $21,240 over 1y, 9.6% of budgetAPEX ADVOCACY INC: $20,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetTHRIVE PHILANTHROPY INCORPORATED: $20,000 over 1y, 2.7% 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.

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 Quinn FoundationEffective Ventures Fo…Humane America Animal…Vegfund IncTipping Point Private…A Well-Fed WorldRsf Social Finance IncThe Greenbaum Foundat…Karuna FoundationAceso Foundation IncGood Ventures Foundat…Kh Dominion Foundatio…
The Quinn FoundationKS61.4× affinity27 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Quinn Foundation · Effective Ventures Foundation USA Inc · Humane America Animal Foundation · Vegfund Inc · Tipping Point Private Foundation · A Well-Fed World · Rsf Social Finance Inc · The Greenbaum Foundation · Karuna Foundation · Aceso Foundation Inc · Good Ventures Foundation · Kh Dominion Foundation 5507-21-40

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 Animal Charity Evaluators funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Animal Charity Evaluators. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 90%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Trustees of Tufts College: 13% of income from government
  • Lewis & Clark College: 2% of income from government
  • Anthropocene Alliance: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
9get 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
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Animal Charity Evaluators?

Find your warmest path to Animal Charity Evaluators 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 83 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 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 Animal Charity Evaluators’ 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