Skip to content
Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy Inc

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.

$16k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$10k
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, FY2019 to 2024.

Animals$134kScience & Tech$59kInternational$34kEducation$9kEnvironment$4kCivil Rights$3kFood & Nutrition$2kPhilanthropy$103
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$466k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY$10,000
UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH$6,000
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.

US giving: 82% of grant dollars ($200k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 18% that went abroad ($44k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 58% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS: $59k → 11%CREATURE KIND: $25k → 6%FOOD EMPOWERMENT PROJECT: $2k → 8%RANCHO COMPASSION: $3k → 8%ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $15k → 9%MERCY FOR ANIMALS: $3k → 14%NEW YORK UNIVERSITY: $10k → 17%THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES: $6k → 14%HUMAN ECOLOGY PROJECT: $2k → 9%YALE UNIVERSITY - YALE LAW: $9k → 12%EXOTIC FELINE RESCUE CENTER: $5k → 13%CHAPPY AND FRIENDS: $1k → 7%ILLINOIS BAR ASSOCIATION: $4k → 11%HELP AFRICAN ANIMALS: $8k → 14%CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $34k → 9%PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS (PETA): $1k → 19%BALTIMORE ANIMAL RESCUE & CARE SHELTER: $1k → 6%ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $1k → 9%THE GENTLE BARN: $1k → 14%THE NONHUMAN RIGHTS PROJECT INC: $3k → 14%HUMAN ECOLOGY PROJECT: $2k → 9%ILLINOIS BAR ASSOCIATION: $2k → 11%HELP AFRICAN ANIMALS: $8k → 14%PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS (PETA): $500 → 19%ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $200 → 9%NETWORK FOR GOOD: $103 → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
MA
OR
IN
PA
CT
CA
VA
MD
DC
FL

Beyond the US: 18% of all-years giving ($44k)

2 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
United Kingdom$39k · 1 grant
Canada$5k · 1 grant
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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 18% of Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 18% directed abroad (not shown)
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.

19%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$42k · 5 repeat orgs$183k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +82% since the first grant, against +32% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
16

Total granted

$42k
$167k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+82%
+32%

Still filing today

40%
69%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $16k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsFood & NutritionEducationOther
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

  • AL
    ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $16k · revenue +34%
  • HA
    HELP AFRICAN ANIMALS
    2× · 2022–2024 · $16k
  • IB
    ILLINOIS BAR ASSOCIATION
    2× · 2021–2023 · $6k

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS
    one grant, 2019 · $59k
  • CC
    CAMBRIDGE CENTRE FOR ANIMAL RIGHTS LAW
    one grant, 2023 · $39k
  • CK
    CREATURE KIND
    one grant, 2019 · $25k
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
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
2
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
3
World Animal Protection

World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…

Animals
4
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
5
Four Paws International Inc

Our vision is a world where humans treat animals with respect, empathy and understanding. four paws mission is to be the strong, global and independent voice for animals.

Animals
6
Humane World Action Fund

To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.

Animals
7
Last Chance for Animals

Dedicated to ending animal abuse and exploitation through education, public outreach and investigations.

Animals
8
Animal Legal Defense Fund Cruelty Prevention Unit dba Caru Spca

The Animal Legal Defense Fund Cruelty Prevention Unit's primary mission is to prevent cruelty to animals.

Human Services
9
The Animal Welfare Foundation
—
10
Animal Diplomacy

Supporting and assisting with rescue, sheltering, spay/neuter, and rehoming of cats and dogs in needy developing countries. Our current exclusive focus is on Egypt and the Egyptian Society for Mercy to Animals.

Animals
11
Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy Inc
Philanthropy
12
Lexus Project Inc

Legal defense for animals

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mercy for Animals Inc; the most unlike its peers is Speak Out for Animals. 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

16 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. 16 of the 25 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
11/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS: $59,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTSCAMBRIDGE CENTRE FOR ANIMAL RIGHTS LAW: $39,175 · OtherCAMBRIDGE CENTRE FOR ANIMAL RIGHTS LAWCREATURE KIND: $25,000 · OtherCREATURE KINDHELP AFRICAN ANIMALS: $15,700 · OtherHELP AFRICAN ANIMALSYALE UNIVERSITY - YALE LAW: $9,000 · OtherYALE UNIVERSITY - YALE LAWUNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH: $6,000 · Other+3 more: $13,500 · Other+3 moreANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $16,200 · AnimalsANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE…Humane World for Animals Inc: $6,000 · AnimalsHumane World for Ani…Exotic Feline Rescue Center: $5,000 · AnimalsExotic Feline Rescue…SPEAK OUT FOR ANIMALS: $5,000 · AnimalsSPEAK OUT FOR ANIMAL…Nonhuman Rights Project Inc: $3,000 · AnimalsNonhuman Rights Proj…MERCY FOR ANIMALS INC: $3,000 · AnimalsMERCY FOR ANIMALS IN…RANCHO COMPASION: $3,000 · AnimalsRANCHO COMPASION+5 more: $5,500 · Animals+5 moreCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $34,000 · PhilanthropyCHARITIES AID …New York University: $10,000 · EducationFood Empowerment Project: $1,500 · Food & NutritionNETWORK FOR GOOD: $103 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$167,375Animals$46,700Philanthropy$34,000Education$10,000Food & Nutrition$1,500Public Safety & Disaster$103

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 budgetCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $34,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $16,200 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetHumane World for Animals Inc: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetExotic Feline Rescue Center: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSPEAK OUT FOR ANIMALS: $5,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetNonhuman Rights Project Inc: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMERCY FOR ANIMALS INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRANCHO COMPASION: $3,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetFood Empowerment Project: $1,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS INC: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF DUPAGE COUNTY ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetBALTIMORE ANIMAL RESCUE AND CARE SHELTER BARCS: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHAPPY & FRIENDS: $1,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTHE GENTLE BARN FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNETWORK FOR GOOD: $103 over 1y, 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.

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.

Vanguard Charitable E…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA8.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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, 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 Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy 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 25 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 Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy’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