Skip to content
Ray Rowe Trust for Animals No Two at a glance

· Private foundation

Ray Rowe Trust for Animals No Two

Its FY2022 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$144k
Granted FY2022
21
Grants FY2022
14
States reached
$20k
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, FY2020 to 2022.

Animals$184k
02FY2022 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k16 grants · $69k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $75k
$5,000
Median grant
14
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
The Wildlife Center of Virginia$20,000
Pacific Primate Sanctuary$15,000
Days End Farm Horse Rescue$15,000
Animal Rescue Inc$15,000
Central Missouri Humane Society$10,000
Humane Rescue Alliance$8,000
Nuzzles Co Rescue Ranch$7,500
Paws of Honor$5,000
Animal Rescue of The Rockies$5,000
Ironwood Pig Sanctuary$5,000
Front Porch Felines$5,000
Sam's Hope$5,000
Rockfish Wildlife Sanctuary$5,000
Friends of Ferals Northern Colorado$5,000
Pet Community Center$5,000
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 (FY20–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 60% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Sam's Hope: $5k → 7%Berkeley-East Bay Humane Society: $3k → 10%Cats In Need of Human Care: $3k → 11%Pacific Primate Sanctuary: $15k → 9%SPCA International: $3k → 17%Palm Valley Animal Society: $3k → 27%Humane Rescue Alliance: $8k → 14%Central Missouri Humane Society: $10k → 17%Pet Community Center: $5k → 14%Paul's Clinic: $2k → 15%Friends of The Stokes Shelter Inc: $2k → 11%Nuzzles Co Rescue Ranch: $8k → 5%Humane Society of Utah: $5k → 8%Animal Rescue of The Rockies: $5k → 8%Front Porch Felines: $5k → 9%Friends of Ferals Northern Colorado: $5k → 11%Back to Basics Project -- Pet Food Pantry: $3k → 18%Paws of Honor: $5k → 6%The Wildlife Center of Virginia: $20k → 8%Rockfish Wildlife Sanctuary: $5k → 8%Pets of The Homeless: $2k → 13%Days End Farm Horse Rescue: $15k → 6%Animal Rescue Inc: $15k → 11%Berkeley-East Bay Humane Society: $3k → 10%Cats In Need of Human Care: $3k → 11%Humane Rescue Alliance: $3k → 14%Back to Basics -- Pet Food Pantry: $3k → 18%Wildlife Ceter of Virginia: $3k → 8%Pets of the Homeless: $2k → 13%Animal Rescue Inc: $2k → 11%Foster Army Animal Rescue: $2k → 11%Back to Basics Project Petfood Pantry: $2k → 18%Animal Rescue: $2k → 11%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

NY
NV
IN
PA
CA
UT
CO
MO
VA
MD
AZ
TN
NC
SC
DC
HI
TX
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.

39%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$73k · 7 repeat orgs$112k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +47% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2022, 2 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
6

Total granted

$73k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+14%

Still filing today

86%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $96k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • TW
    THE WILDLIFE CENTER OF VIRGINIA
    2× · 2021–2022 · $23k · revenue +47%
  • AR
    ANIMAL RESCUE INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $19k · revenue +40%
  • WH
    WASHINGTON HUMANE SOCIETY
    2× · 2020–2022 · $11k · revenue +6%

Funded once

  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAHgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +35%
  • PV
    PALM VALLEY ANIMAL SOCIETY FKA PALM VALLEY ANIMAL CENTER
    one grant, 2020 · $3k · revenue +14%
  • SI
    SPCA INTERNATIONAL INC
    one grant, 2020 · $3k · revenue -8%
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
Paws and Claws Animal Shelter
Animals
2
Raskels Rescue
Animals
3
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
4
Hope Fur Paws Rescue

To help injured, abandoned and unwanted animals. We provide food, vet care that includes heartworm prevention and spay or neuter services, shelter and anything else needed.

Animals
5
Pound Pets Inc

Animal Rescue - finding homes for abandoned animals in Granite City, spaying and neutering stray animals and feral cats

Animals
6
Fur Animal Rescue

Animal rescue organization dedicated to finding homes for animals at the animal shelter. we also provde vet care foster homes, and assistance with homing for special needs animals.

Animals
7
Humane Society of Southern Arizona

To compassionately serve pets and the people who love them.

Animals
8
Paws Animal Rescue Center

To help rescue unwanted pets

Animals
9
All About Animals Rescue

All about animals rescue's mission is no more homeless pets.

Animals
10
Stephens County Humane Society

We are a non-profit, no-kill animal rescue shelterToday, the Humane Society providesMedical treatment for animals,shots and heart worm tests, medications,foster homes, care and feed for fostered animals not housed at the shelter, trailer…

Animals
11
Humane Society of Union County Inc

The Humane Society of Union County exists to reduce the number of abused, abandoned, and neglected cats and dogs through rescue, rehabilitation, adoption, and spay and neuter.

Animals
12
Animal Humane Society Veterinary Centers Pc

Provide wellness and spay/neuter services at reduced cost for people in need.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Feeding Pets of the Homeless Aka Pets of the Homeless; the most unlike its peers is Pacific Primate Sanctuary Inc. 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

23 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. 23 of the 29 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/23
Grantees still filing
19/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE WILDLIFE CENTER OF VIRGINIA: $23,000 · AnimalsTHE WILDLIFE CENTER OF VIRGINIAANIMAL RESCUE INC: $19,000 · AnimalsANIMAL RESCUE INCPACIFIC PRIMATE SANCTUARY INC: $15,000 · AnimalsPACIFIC PRIMATE SANCTUARY INCDAYS END FARM HORSE RESCUE INC: $15,000 · AnimalsDAYS END FARM HORSE RESCUE INCWASHINGTON HUMANE SOCIETY: $10,500 · AnimalsWASHINGTON HUMANE SOCIETYCENTRAL MISSOURI HUMANE SOCIETY: $10,000 · AnimalsCENTRAL MISSOURI HUMANE SOCIETYCATS IN NEED OF HUMAN CARE: $6,000 · Animals+16 more: $63,900 · Animals+16 moreNuzzles Co Rescue Ranch: $7,500 · OtherNuzzles Co Re…Back to Basics Project -- Pet Food Pantry: $5,000 · OtherBack to Basic…Friends of Ferals Northern Colorado: $5,000 · OtherFriends of Fe…Back to Basics -- Pet Food Pantry: $3,000 · OtherBack to Basic…+2 more: $1,383 · Other+2 more
Animals$162,400Other$21,883

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 budgetTHE WILDLIFE CENTER OF VIRGINIA: $23,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetANIMAL RESCUE INC: $19,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetPACIFIC PRIMATE SANCTUARY INC: $15,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetDAYS END FARM HORSE RESCUE INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetWASHINGTON HUMANE SOCIETY: $10,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCENTRAL MISSOURI HUMANE SOCIETY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCATS IN NEED OF HUMAN CARE: $6,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetTHE MARY C SCHANZ FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPAWS OF HONOR INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF UTAH: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBerkeley East Bay Humane Society Inc dba Berkeley Humane: $5,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSAMS HOPE: $5,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetPET COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetANIMAL RESCUE OF THE ROCKIES: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetROCKFISH WILDLIFE SANCTUARY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetFEEDING PETS OF THE HOMELESS AKA PETS OF THE HOMELESS: $4,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPALM VALLEY ANIMAL SOCIETY FKA PALM VALLEY ANIMAL CENTER: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSPCA INTERNATIONAL INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ANIMAL MISSION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetPAULS CLINIC INC: $2,400 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetFriends of the Stokes County Shelter Inc: $2,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetFOSTER ARMY ANIMAL RESCUE: $2,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

Ray Rowe 1988 Tr for …BISSELL Pet FoundationPetsmart Charities IncPedigree FoundationThe Summerlee Foundat…Banfield FoundationLeslie L Alexander Fo…The Duffield Family F…Thornton S Jr and Kat…Best Friends Animal S…The American Society …Petco Love
Ray Rowe 1988 Tr for AnimalsMD24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ray Rowe 1988 Tr for Animals · BISSELL Pet Foundation · Petsmart Charities Inc · Pedigree Foundation · The Summerlee Foundation · Banfield Foundation · Leslie L Alexander Foundation Inc · The Duffield Family Foundation Dba Maddie's Fund · Thornton S Jr and Katrina D Glide Foundation · Best Friends Animal Society · The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals · Petco Love

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 Ray Rowe Trust for Animals No Two funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ray Rowe Trust for Animals No Two. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%5%11%20%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 Ray Rowe Trust for Animals No Two?

    Find your warmest path to Ray Rowe Trust for Animals No Two 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 29 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Ray Rowe Trust for Animals No Two’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