Skip to content
Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

The mission of the mspca is to protect animals, relieve their suffering, advance their health and welfare, prevent cruelty and work for a just and compassionate society.

$2.7M
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2024.

Animals$277kEducation$28k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $35,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,653,693 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,618,693 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.
$25,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$252M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL INC$25,000
BROTHER WOLF ANIMAL RESCUE$10,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 78% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR NANTUCKET INC: $5k → 6%ANIMAL PROTECTION CENTER OF SOUTHEASTERN MASSACHUSETTS: $5k → 8%OPERATION OUTREACH: $10k → 8%FOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL INC: $25k → 16%THOMAS J O'CONNOR ANIMAL CONTROL AND ADOPTION CENTER: $5k → 17%ROBERT POTTER LEAGUE FOR ANIMALS INC: $19k → 7%NOWZAD DOGS NFP: $12k → 14%SPCA OF HANCOCK COUNTY: $6k → 11%GRAZE IN PEACE: $112k → 13%COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR NANTUCKET INC: $2k → 6%ANIMAL PROTECTION CENTER OF SOUTHEASTERN MASSACHUSETTS: $3k → 8%OPERATION OUTREACH: $9k → 8%FOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL: $20k → 16%NOWZAD DOGS NFP: $12k → 14%OPERATION OUTREACH: $9k → 8%FOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL: $10k → 16%NOWZAD DOGS NFP: $11k → 14%NOWZAD DOGS NFP: $10k → 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.
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 16% of Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animalslessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 15% 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.

46%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$136k · 4 repeat orgs$162k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
5

Total granted

$136k
$152k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+168%

Still filing today

75%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
AnimalsYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • FP
    FOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL INC
    3× · 2021–2024 · $55k · revenue +52%
  • ND
    NOWZAD DOGS NFP
    4× · 2017–2020 · $45k · revenue -26%
  • OO
    OPERATION OUTREACH-USA INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $28k

Funded once

  • GI
    GRAZE IN PEACE
    one grant, 2018 · $112k
  • ROBERT POTTER LEAGUE FOR ANIMALS INC
    one grant, 2023 · $19k · revenue +4%
  • TP
    THE PEGASUS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
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
Animal Rescuers Without Borders

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.

Animals
3
Animal Protective Association

Promoting the welfare of cats & protecting them from cruelty by providing an adoption service & shelter, working towards the reduction of cat overpopulation & educating the public about responsible cat care, including spay/neuter, safety,…

Animals
4
Animal Orphanage

The mission of the Animal Orphanage is to care for and adopt out the stray or abandoned animals in our local communities. It is a no kill shelter that utilizes rigorous spay/neuter activites to reduce the number of lost and abandoned…

Animals
5
Save a Pet Animal Rescue Inc

Save-A-Pet Animal Rescue believes it is their moral responsibility to protect and improve the lives of abused, abandoned and homeless animals and to place them in loving, permanent homes. They provide spay and neuter services and any…

Animals
6
Paws - Preservation of Animal Welfare & Safety Inc

The organization is a no-kill animal rescue. paws saves lives and prevents suffering by implementing the no-kill philosophy through aggressive spay/neuter programs for owned and unowned animals. this is accomplished by rescuing, fostering,…

Animals
7
American Alliance for Protection of Animals Aapa Inc

American Alliance for Protection of Animals is a not for profit charity organization based in New York City, that protects animals and promotes animal welfare. We educate and spread awareness about animal cruelty and neglect and puppy…

Animals
8
Survivors Paws Animal Rescue Inc

Survivors Paws Animal Rescue Inc rescues dogs and cats from southern state kill shelters and off the streets to save them being euthanized. We also help contract by the pet population by spaying and neutering and educating the public on…

Animals
9
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
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
Animal Protection League of Okaloosa County Inc

We are a non-profit organization who provide low cost spay and neuter service for cats and dogs.

Animals
12
Animal Rescue of the Rockies

Animal Care and Adoption - ARR's mission is to save the lives of homeless and abandoned dogs and cats. Our goal is reaching a no-kill society in the United States.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals of Hancock Count; the most unlike its peers is Operation Outreach-Usa Inc. 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

9 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. 9 of the 11 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GRAZE IN PEACE: $112,000 · OtherGRAZE IN PEACEOPERATION OUTREACH-USA INC: $28,100 · OtherOPERATION OUTREACH-USA INCTHE PEGASUS FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherTHE PEGASUS FOUNDATIONFOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL INC: $55,000 · AnimalsFOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL INCNOWZAD DOGS NFP: $44,500 · AnimalsNOWZAD DOGS NFPROBERT POTTER LEAGUE FOR ANIMALS INC: $19,000 · AnimalsROBERT POTTER LEAGUE FOR ANIMALS INCBrother Wolf Animal Rescue Inc: $10,000 · AnimalsBrother Wolf Animal Rescue IncSOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OF HANCOCK COUNT: $6,300 · AnimalsTHOMAS J OCONNOR ANIMAL CONTROL AND ADOPTION CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · AnimalsAnimal Protection Center of Southeastern Massachusetts Inc: $8,000 · Youth DevelopmentCommunity Foundation for Nantucket Inc: $6,968 · Philanthropy
Other$150,100Animals$139,800Youth Development$8,000Philanthropy$6,968

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL INC: $55,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetNOWZAD DOGS NFP: $44,500 over 4y, 3.4% of budgetROBERT POTTER LEAGUE FOR ANIMALS INC: $19,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBrother Wolf Animal Rescue Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAnimal Protection Center of Southeastern Massachusetts Inc: $8,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetCommunity Foundation for Nantucket Inc: $6,968 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS OF HANCOCK COUNT: $6,300 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetTHOMAS J OCONNOR ANIMAL CONTROL AND ADOPTION CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 2.1% 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 Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC8.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 10%
  • Community Foundation for Nantucket Inc: 10% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get 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 · 0–20%
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 11 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ 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