· Public charity
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 testing and research, respond to natural disasters and confront cruelty to animals in all its forms.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 4 grants below total $393,407 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $15,896,041 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $15,502,634 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 · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $36k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $107k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Species Survival Network | $250,000 |
| Ukrainian American House | $107,407 |
| Friends of Bonobos | $20,000 |
| Lucky Animal Protection Shelter | $16,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY22–24, $332k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 32% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
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
Grants abroad, by region — $16M on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 9 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: General Support · Funding to help cover one year of salary costs for a coordinator for the Social Media Animal Cruelty Coalition · Repair damage done to shelter during hurricane Ernesto
Stated purpose: General Support · Funding for medicines, vaccines, supplies, animal feed, and water for animals impacted by flooding and landslides in Tanzania
Stated purpose: General Support · Funding for plant-based outreach and capacity building workshops for entrepreneurs in Sri Lanka, campaign to promote plant-based food options, cruelty free and sustainable food production · Promote programs and research designed to develop non-animal research testing
Stated purpose: General Support · Construction of additional enclosures at the wildlife sanctuary for wolves which were received after the closure of a zoo in Quebec · Reimburse funds used to transfer a group of wolves to Aspen Valley Wildlife Sanctuary after the closure of Zoo St. Edouard, In Quebec
Stated purpose: General Support
Stated purpose: General Support · Assist with rescue and care of stray animals, support care and treatment of animals rescued from dog meat trade, assist with adoption events, funding to repair shelter damaged by storm · Promoting Human-Elephant Coexistence in Vietnam through Science-based Solutions and Inclusive Collaboration
Stated purpose: Funding to rescue dogs displaced from the Gaza strip into Israel during the conflict between Israel and Palestine · Funding for shelter, veterinary care, vaccines, and supplies for animals impacted by the conflict between Hezbollah in Lebanon and Israeli defense forces
Stated purpose: Promote non-lethal measures that mitigate human-puma conflict in Argentina, promote bans on trophy hunting in Argentina · Deliver low-cost, high-quality spay/neuter services and rabies vaccinations to dogs and cats in Laguna Verde, Valparaiso and Vina del Mar, Chile
Stated purpose: Funding to evacuate animals from a private zoo within Ukraine, funding to relocate animals and provide post-evacuation care for six months, Funding for construction of a medical building for horse surgeries and for construction of additional structures at a bear sanctuary within Ukraine
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 37% of Humane World for Animals International’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 18% of the giving stays in DC; read by stated purpose it is 14% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
9 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $107k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- SSSPECIES SURVIVAL NETWORK8× · 2017–2024 · $479k · revenue +272% · 72% of their budget
- HWHumane World for Animals Inc4× · 2018–2023 · $107k · revenue +61%
- TBThe Bhutan Foundation2× · 2021–2022 · $93k · revenue +50%
Funded once
- BEBELIZE ECONOMIC & ECOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT FUNDone grant, 2017 · $75k
- UWUKRAINE WAR ANIMALS RELIEF FUNDone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -67%
- TFThe Fund for Animals Incone grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue -76%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
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…
To improve the health & well-being of animals through veterinary aid, response, training, research & local capacity building worldwide. We provide services to companion animals, horses, street dogs, livestock and marine animals including…
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.
Battling against the overpopulation of homeless pets and improving the lives of companion animals through rescue, fostering programs, adoption, pet care, educational programs and of course spaying and neutering.
Cultivating the empowerment of women globally who promote animal activism and welfare. women united. men invited
prevention of cruelty to animals
Our mission is to move adoptable dogs and cats primarily from heavily-burdened areas to loving homes. We work with trusted partners throughout the country and around the world and facilitate vet care, transport, and adoptions to help…
Dog Rescue and Shelter in DR
Animal Welfare
Reduce animal euthanasia by providing free spay and neuters, free shots, pet food and public education
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Animal Balance and the most unlike its peers is Sustainable Vets International 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.
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 15 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 9% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
23 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. 23 of the 27 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds SPECIES SURVIVAL NETWORK ↗
- Who funds MIGHTYVET ↗
- Who funds PUERTO RICO ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY INC PAWS ↗
- Who funds UKRAINIAN AMERICAN HOUSE ↗
- Who funds Humane World for Animals Inc ↗
- Who funds The Bhutan Foundation ↗
- Who funds UKRAINE WAR ANIMALS RELIEF FUND ↗
- Who funds The Fund for Animals Inc ↗
- Who funds GUAM ANIMALS IN NEED INC ↗
- Who funds NOWZAD DOGS NFP ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF BONOBOS ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF MEXICAN ANIMAL WELFARE ↗
- Who funds THE INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE COEXISTENCE NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds PROVEG INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds FOR THE FISHES ↗
- Who funds PUERTO RICO ALLIANCE FOR COMPANION ANIMALS INC ↗
- Who funds THE WILDLIFE CENTER OF VIRGINIA ↗
- Who funds SUSTAINABLE VETS INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds BAJA CALIFORNIA SPAY NEUTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds International Institute of Rural Reconstruction ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL BALANCE ↗
- Who funds BANCROFT GLOBAL DEVELOPMENT ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Humane World for Animals Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Network for Good · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Humane World for Animals International 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Humane World for Animals International?
Find your warmest path to Humane World for Animals International 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.