Skip to content
The Cats Meow Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Cats Meow Foundation

Its FY2021 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$354
Granted FY2021
2
Grants FY2021
2
States reached
$177
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Animals$60kEnvironment$18kPhilanthropy$8kEducation$2kRecreation & Sports$2kPublic Benefit$1kFood & Nutrition$750Arts & Culture$500Other$0
02FY2021 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$177
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MUTTVILLE SENIOR DOG RESCUE$177
WILDCAT SANCTUARY$177
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 (FY17–21) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 46% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%COALITION FOR BUZZARDS BAY: $500 → 11%WINSON FUND SCHOOL: $1k → 16%WILDCAT SANCTUARY: $11k → 12%PACIFIC BEACH COALITION: $200 → 7%FELIDAE CONSERVATION: $5k → 8%FRIENDS OF ROMAN CATS: $1k → 10%HOPE FOR PAWS: $1k → 14%FARM SANCTUARY: $1k → 12%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $5k → 17%CENTER FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC: $150 → 14%BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $1k → 9%OWENS FOUNDATION: $8k → 14%WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $10k → 9%DIVINE FELINE: $3k → 12%THE FELINE FUND: $6k → 7%PET FOOD AID: $500 → 11%WINSON FUND SCHOOL: $1k → 16%WILDCAT SANCTUARY: $5k → 12%FELIDAE CONSERVATION: $1k → 8%FRIENDS OF ROMAN CATS: $500 → 10%HOPE FOR PAWS: $250 → 14%ENVIRONMENT DEFENSE FUND: $1k → 17%CENTER FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC IN: $100 → 14%DIVINE FELINE: $1k → 12%THE FELINE FUND: $1k → 7%WILDCAT SANCTUARY: $3k → 12%MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $2k → 8%MUTTVILLE SENIOR DOG RESCUE: $1k → 10%LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS: $1k → 14%DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE: $500 → 12%WILDCAT SANCTUARY: $177 → 12%MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $1k → 8%MUTTVILLE SENIOR DOG RESCUE: $500 → 10%DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE: $100 → 12%MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $500 → 8%MUTTVILLE SENIOR DOG RESCUE: $177 → 10%WILDCARE: $5k → 8%SAN FRANCISCO MARIN FOOD BANK: $100 → 10%WILDCARE: $3k → 8%EARTH JUSTICE: $11k → 10%EARTH JUSTICE: $1k → 10%KALW: $500 → 10%SF BOTANICAL GARDEN: $55 → 10%CA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION: $2k → 10%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
MN
NY
MA
NJ
CA
UT
CO
DC
GA
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.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$66k · 12 repeat orgs$32k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +82% since the first grant, against +59% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2021, 10 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
19

Total granted

$66k
$32k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+82%
+59%

Still filing today

50%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’21
AnimalsEnvironmentFood & NutritionOther
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 WILDCAT SANCTUARY
    4× · 2017–2021 · $19k · revenue +175%
  • EARTHJUSTICE
    2× · 2017–2019 · $12k · revenue +82%
  • W
    WILDCARE
    2× · 2017–2018 · $8k · revenue +193%

Funded once

  • TW
    THE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +124%
  • TO
    THE OWENS FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2018 · $8k
  • NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +37%
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
Humane World Action Fund

To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.

Animals
3
World Animal Protection

World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…

Animals
4
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
5
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
6
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…

Animals
7
Environmental and Animal Defense

At Environmental and Animal Defense, our mission is to provide Colorado with access to affordable legal services for environmental and animal issues, in addition to protecting wildlife and their habitats through enforcement of the law. No…

Crime & Legal
8
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment
9
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
10
Predator Defense

Protecting vital native predators & ending war on wildlife.

Animals
11
Animal Outlook Inc

Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.

Animals
12
Environmental Defense Center

The organization protects and enhances the local environment through education, advocacy and legal action.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Farm Sanctuary Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Owens Foundation 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

15 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. 15 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
13/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE WILDCAT SANCTUARY: $18,777 · AnimalsTHE WILDCAT SANCTUARYTHE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $10,000 · AnimalsTHE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARYTHE FELINE FIX: $4,648 · AnimalsTHE FELINE FIXTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $3,500 · AnimalsTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER+4 more: $4,250 · Animals+4 moreTHE OWENS FOUNDATION INC: $8,000 · OtherTHE OWENS FOUNDATION INCWILDCARE: $7,500 · OtherWILDCARETHE FELINE FUND: $7,000 · OtherTHE FELINE FUNDIndividual grant recipient: $6,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientWINSON FUND SCHOOL: $2,000 · OtherMUTTVILLE SENIOR DOG RESCUE: $1,677 · OtherCA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION: $1,500 · OtherFRIENDS OF ROMAN CATS: $1,500 · Other+10 more: $3,905 · Other+10 moreEARTHJUSTICE: $11,500 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICENATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $5,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DE…ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENS…+1 more: $200 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST: $150 · Food & Nutrition
Animals$41,175Other$39,082Environment$17,700Food & Nutrition$150

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 budgetTHE WILDCAT SANCTUARY: $18,777 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $11,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWILDCARE: $7,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FELINE FIX: $4,648 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $3,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE FOR PAWS: $1,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFARM SANCTUARY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTH VALLEY ANIMAL DISASTER GROUP: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPacific Beach Coalition: $200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK: $100 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds THE WILDCAT SANCTUARY ↗
  • Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds THE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY ↗
  • Who funds WILDCARE ↗
  • Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds THE FELINE FIX ↗
  • Who funds THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds HOPE FOR PAWS ↗
  • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds FARM SANCTUARY INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTH VALLEY ANIMAL DISASTER GROUP ↗
  • Who funds BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds Pacific Beach Coalition ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST ↗
  • Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK ↗

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.

American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE7.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 The Cats Meow Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Cats Meow Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Cats Meow’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