Skip to content
National Anti-Vivisection Society at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

National Anti-Vivisection Society

Navs is dedicated to ending the exploitation of animals used in science.

$446k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$150k
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$3.7MEducation$8kScience & Tech$5kPublic Safety & Disaster$5k
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $364,097, the rows itemized in this filing. The $446,269 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $82,172 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

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $113k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $245k
$15,450
Median grant
8
States reached
$28M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH$150,000
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW$95,000
PRIMATES INCORPORATED$21,000
KINDNESS RANCH ANIMAL SANCTUARY$19,932
CHIMP HAVEN$16,432
SAVE THE CHIMPS$15,450
CENTER FOR GREAT APES$10,000
ESTHER NEONATAL KITTEN ALLIANCE$10,000
BROTHER WOLF ANIMAL RESCUE$10,000
PEACEABLE PRIMATE SANCTUARY$10,000
BEAGLE FREEDOM PROJECT$6,283
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 98% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NORTH STAR RESCUE: $10k → 7%NEW LIFE ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $10k → 11%BEAGLE FREEDOM PROJECT: $25k → 14%ARTHUR'S ACRES ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $10k → 16%PRIMARILY PRIMATES INC: $28k → 16%OKLAHOMA PRIMATE SANCTUARY: $10k → 10%JUNGLE FRIENDS PRIMATE SANCTUARY: $31k → 19%CENTER FOR GREAT APES: $10k → 25%PRIMATES INCOPORATED: $12k → 10%ESTHER NEONATAL KITTEN ALLIANCE: $10k → 12%FOSTER PARROTS LTD: $10k → 7%PROJECT CHIMPS: $15k → 11%PEACEABLE PRIMATE SANCTUARY: $20k → 14%CHIMPANZEE SANCTUARY NORTHWEST: $10k → 11%INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH: $250k → 14%HOMEWARD TRAILS ANIMAL RESCUE: $10k → 6%KINDNESS RANCH ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $20k → 12%CHIMP HAVEN: $50k → 22%NEW LIFE ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $10k → 11%PRIMARILY PRIMATES INC: $10k → 16%MINDY'S MEMORY PRIMATE SANCTUARY INC: $10k → 10%JUNGLE FRIENDS PRIMATE SANCTUARY: $10k → 19%CENTER FOR GREAT APES: $10k → 25%PROJECT CHIMPS: $15k → 11%PEACEABLE PRIMATE SANCTUARY: $17k → 14%INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH: $250k → 14%CHIMP HAVEN: $20k → 22%PEACEABLE PRIMATE SANCTUARY: $15k → 14%INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH: $210k → 14%CHIMP HAVEN: $18k → 22%PEACEABLE PRIMATE SANCTUARY: $12k → 14%INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH: $200k → 14%CHIMP HAVEN: $16k → 22%INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH: $150k → 14%JUNGLE FRIENDS PRIMATE SANCTUARY: $15k → 14%INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH: $400k → 14%INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH: $225k → 14%INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH: $150k → 14%INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH: $125k → 14%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW: $145k → 14%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW: $120k → 14%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW: $120k → 14%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW: $95k → 14%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW: $95k → 14%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW: $95k → 14%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW: $95k → 14%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW: $95k → 14%INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW: $95k → 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

WA
IL
WI
NY
WY
IN
RI
CA
VA
MD
AR
NC
DC
OK
LA
GA
TX
FL
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.6M · 17 repeat orgs$102k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +59% since the first grant, against +30% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
13

Total granted

$3.6M
$92k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+59%
+30%

Still filing today

94%
85%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
AnimalsSocial ScienceEducationOther
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

  • IF
    INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +59% · 92% of their budget
  • CHIMP HAVEN INC
    6× · 2017–2025 · $124k · revenue +189%
  • PP
    Peaceable Primate Sanctuary
    8× · 2017–2025 · $104k · revenue +420%

Funded once

  • AA
    ARTHURS ACRES ANIMAL SANCTUARY CORPORATION
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +13%
  • HT
    HOMEWARD TRAILS ANIMAL RESCUE INC
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -33%
  • FP
    FOSTER PARROTS LTDgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +30%
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
Forever Wild Wildlife Rescue
Animals
3
Professional Animal Retirement Center Inc

Professional animal retirement center (parc), inc. known locally as black pine animal sanctuary was established to provide refuge to displaced, captive-raised exotic animals for the rest of their lives and to educate people about…

Animals
4
Bella View Farm Animal Sanctuary Inc
Animals
5
Paws Claws Exotics

A sanctuary for unfortunate animals

—
6
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
7
From the Heart Animal Sanctuary
Animals
8
Wild Souls Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation
Animals
9
Chase Animal Rescue and Sanctuary Inc

Our mission is to bring the community and the exotic primate/exotic preservation mission together in a way that enhances lives. To help preserve critically endangered species through sharing of data, animals, and resources with other…

Animals
10
Happy Hen Animal Sanctuary
Animals
11
Karma Farm Sanctuary Inc
Animals
12
Martha's Farm Animal Sanctuary
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Foster Parrots Ltd; the most unlike its peers is Esther Neonatal Kitten Alliance. 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

28 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 28 of the 31 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
13
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/28
Grantees still filing
20/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH INC: $1,960,000 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH INCINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW INC: $955,000 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW INCCHIMP HAVEN INC: $124,432 · Animals+23 more: $648,929 · Animals+23 moreNORTH STAR RESCUE: $10,000 · OtherNORTH AMERICAN PRIMATE SANCTUARY ALLIANCE: $10,000 · OtherSTRAY CENTRAL: $5,000 · OtherJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $7,500 · EducationSOCIETY FOR IN VITRO BIOLOGY: $5,000 · Social Science
Animals$3,688,361Other$25,000Education$7,500Social Science$5,000

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 budgetINTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ETHICAL RESEARCH INC: $1,960,000 over 9y, 92% of budgetINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR ANIMAL LAW INC: $955,000 over 9y, 97% of budgetCHIMP HAVEN INC: $124,432 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetPeaceable Primate Sanctuary: $103,750 over 8y, 9.5% of budgetSAVE THE CHIMPS INC: $73,264 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetJungle Friends Primate Sanctuary: $68,500 over 5y, 4.3% of budgetPRIMATES INCORPORATED: $68,200 over 5y, 8.8% of budgetBEAGLE FREEDOM PROJECT: $43,783 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetPRIMARILY PRIMATES INC: $38,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetCenter for Orangutan & Chimpanzee Conservation Inc: $33,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetPROJECT CHIMPS: $30,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTHE KINDNESS RANCH ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $29,932 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetOklahoma Primate Sanctuary Inc: $28,000 over 3y, 3.9% of budgetBrother Wolf Animal Rescue Inc: $20,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetNEW LIFE ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $20,000 over 2y, 7.1% of budgetCHIMPANZEE SANCTUARY NORTHWEST: $18,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetARTHURS ACRES ANIMAL SANCTUARY CORPORATION: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetHOMEWARD TRAILS ANIMAL RESCUE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFOSTER PARROTS LTD: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetLockwood Animal Rescue Center: $7,500 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEquine Rescue and Adoption Foundation Inc: $6,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetEQUINE ADVOCATES INCORPORATED: $6,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSOCIETY FOR IN VITRO BIOLOGY: $5,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetBorn Free USA united with API: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGLOBAL FEDERATION OF ANIMAL SANCTUARIES: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetRowdy Girl Sanctuary 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 American Anti-Viv…Humane World for Anim…Dj and T FoundationA Kinder World Founda…The Summerlee Foundat…Animal Welfare Instit…Ahimsa FoundationAmica Companies Found…The Michele & Agnese …Head & Heart Foundati…Surendra and Karen Gu…Leslie L Alexander Fo…
The American Anti-Vivisection SocietyPA26.4× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The American Anti-Vivisection Society · Humane World for Animals Inc · Dj and T Foundation · A Kinder World Foundation · The Summerlee Foundation · Animal Welfare Institute · Ahimsa Foundation · Amica Companies Foundation · The Michele & Agnese Cestone Foundation Inc - C/O Bank of America Private Bank · Head & Heart Foundation Tr 12319 · Surendra and Karen Gupta Arc Foundation · Leslie L Alexander Foundation Inc

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 National Anti-Vivisection Society funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from National Anti-Vivisection Society. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 20%
  • Society for in Vitro Biology: 20% of income from government
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 National Anti-Vivisection Society?

Find your warmest path to National Anti-Vivisection Society 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 31 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 National Anti-Vivisection Society’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