Skip to content
Susan Michaels Compassion Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Susan Michaels Compassion Trust

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.

$159k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$24k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Animals$464kFood & Nutrition$117kEducation$35kHealth$20kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $152k
$15,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Project Animal Freedom$24,000
Open Sanctuary Project$20,000
Center for Humane Economy$17,500
Individual grant recipient$15,000
Animal Partisan$15,000
Direct Action Everywhere$15,000
Pasados Safe Haven$15,000
Animal Recovery Mission$10,000
Animal Vegan Advocacy Intl$10,000
LEAP$10,000
Better Food Foundation$7,000
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 74% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%LEAP: $25k → 6%Switch for Good: $15k → 10%Direct Action Everywhere: $20k → 10%Animal Place: $25k → 11%Legal Impact for Chickens: $10k → 12%Switch 4 Good: $50k → 14%Farm Sanctuary: $60k → 12%Good Food Institute: $25k → 14%Legal Action for Chickens: $10k → 13%Project Animal Freedom: $10k → 9%Project Animal Freedom: $24k → 11%Open Sanctuary Project: $20k → 12%NW Animal Rights Network: $21k → 9%Pasados Safe Haven: $25k → 9%Animal Partisan: $15k → 9%Peace Ridge Sanctuary: $10k → 13%LEAP: $10k → 6%Swith 4 Good: $10k → 10%Direct Action Everywhere: $15k → 10%Switch 4 Good: $25k → 14%Farm Sanctuary: $25k → 12%Center for a Humane Economy: $25k → 14%Project Animal Freedom: $10k → 11%Pasados Safe Haven: $25k → 9%Center for Humane Economy: $18k → 14%Pasados Safe Haven: $15k → 9%Center for Humane Economy: $6k → 14%Pasado Safe Haven: $10k → 9%Animal Outlook: $15k → 14%People for Ethical Treatment of Ani: $20k → 14%Animal Vegan Advocacy Intl: $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.

Which US states its grants reach

ME
WA
NY
CA
CO
MO
VA
DC
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.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$423k · 8 repeat orgs$228k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +7% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
9

Total granted

$423k
$161k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+7%
0%

Still filing today

88%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $67k went to new ones.

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

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

’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

  • S
    Switch4Good
    3× · 2021–2024 · $85k · revenue +7%
  • PS
    PASADO'S SAFE HAVEN
    4× · 2020–2025 · $75k · revenue +84%
  • AR
    ANIMAL RECOVERY MISSION INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $40k · revenue +77%

Funded once

  • TG
    THE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC
    one grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue -35%
  • AP
    Animal Place
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -23%
  • CF
    Center for a Humane Economy
    one grant, 2023 · $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
Animal Defense Partnership Inc

The Animal Defense Partnership protects animals by providing free legal services to nonprofits that advocate for animals and plant-based diet change. We believe that all animal protection organizations should have access to strong legal…

Animals
3
A Just World

Our mission is to promote a world where all beings live a just life of dignity and respect. To this end, we engage in practical actions, raise funds, spread understanding and foster compassion.

Animals
4
Institute for Animal Happiness

Growing respect and acceptance for veganism through our dedicated work of rescue and creative care, impactful vegan food programs, vibrant education, and consistent advocacy; all strengthened by our engagement with a rising global network…

Animals
5
Peaceful Prairie Sanctuary

Our mission at Peaceful Prairie Sanctuary is to provide a safe, loving and permanent home for rescued farmed animals whom are not accepted at most shelters. In addition to providing life-long care for the animals, we are dedicated to…

Animals
6
Animal Agriculture Alliance

The animal agriculture alliance is a nonprofit organization that helps bridge the communication gap between farm and fork. we connect food industry stakeholders, engage food chain influencers and promote consumer choice by helping key…

Food & Nutrition
7
Food Animal Concerns Trust (Fact Inc)

Food animal concerns trust (fact) promotes the safe and humane production of meat, milk, and eggs. fact envisions that all food-producing animals be raised in a healthy and humane manner so that everyone will have access to safe and…

Animals
8
Brooks Institute for Animal Rights Law and Policy Inc
Philanthropy
9
Pax Fauna

Pax fauna exists to design a more effective social movement for animal freedom in the u.s., using original research as well as careful study of social movement literature and the recent history of the animal movement, in order to reverse…

Animals
10
Animal Protection and Rescue League Inc

Exposing and eliminating animal cruelty.

Animals
11
Mercy for Animals Inc

Mercy for animals' mission is to construct a compassionate food system that is not just kind to animals but essential for the future of our planet and all who share it. our vision of a world where animals are respected, protected, and free…

Animals
12
Catskill Animal Sanctuary Inc

Catskill animal sanctuary rescues farmed animals, ignites social change to end their exploitation, and champions vegan living.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Animal Outlook Inc; the most unlike its peers is Leap 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

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 22 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)
16/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Switch4Good: $85,000 · AnimalsSwitch4GoodFARM SANCTUARY INC: $85,000 · AnimalsFARM SANCTUARY INCPASADO'S SAFE HAVEN: $75,000 · AnimalsPASADO'S SAFE HAVENPROJECT ANIMAL FREEDOM: $44,000 · AnimalsPROJECT ANIMAL FREEDOMANIMAL RECOVERY MISSION INC: $40,000 · AnimalsANIMAL RECOVERY MISSION INCDIRECT ACTION EVERYWHERE: $35,000 · AnimalsDIRECT ACTION EVERYWHEREAnimal Place: $25,000 · AnimalsOPEN SANCTUARY PROJECT INC: $20,000 · Animals+5 more: $60,000 · Animals+5 moreCenter for a Humane Economy: $25,000 · OtherCenter for a Humane…Center for Humane Economy: $23,500 · OtherCenter for Humane E…NW Animal Rights Network: $21,000 · OtherNW Animal Rights Ne…People for Ethical Treatment of Ani: $20,000 · OtherPeople for Ethical …Individual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherIndividual grant re…Legal Action for Chickens: $10,000 · OtherLegal Action for Ch…LEAP INC: $35,000 · EducationTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $25,000 · Food & NutritionBETTER FOOD FOUNDATION INC: $7,000 · Food & Nutrition
Animals$469,000Other$114,500Education$35,000Food & Nutrition$32,000

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 budgetSwitch4Good: $85,000 over 3y, 4.4% of budgetFARM SANCTUARY INC: $85,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetPASADO'S SAFE HAVEN: $75,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetPROJECT ANIMAL FREEDOM: $44,000 over 3y, 21% of budgetANIMAL RECOVERY MISSION INC: $40,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetLEAP INC: $35,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetDIRECT ACTION EVERYWHERE: $35,000 over 2y, 4.0% of budgetTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAnimal Place: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetANIMAL OUTLOOK INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetLEGAL IMPACT FOR CHICKENS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetPEACE RIDGE SANCTUARY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% 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 Quinn FoundationKaruna FoundationVegfund IncGs Donor Advised Phil…Silicon Valley Commun…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…The Pfizer Foundation…Paypal Charitable Giv…Network for GoodThe Bank of America C…
The Quinn FoundationKS15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Quinn Foundation · Karuna Foundation · Vegfund Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable 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 Susan Michaels Compassion Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Susan Michaels Compassion Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%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
    2get no government money at all
    2report 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 Susan Michaels Compassion Trust?

    Find your warmest path to Susan Michaels Compassion Trust 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 22 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 Susan Michaels Compassion’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