· Public charity
The Humane League
We exist to end the abuse of animals raised for food.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 11 grants below total $345,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $4,261,891 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $3,916,891 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k10 grants · $295k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ANIMAL ACTIVIST LEGAL DEFENSE PROJECT VIA UNIVERSITY OF DENVER | $50,000 |
| CHILIS ON WHEELS VIA A WELL-FED WORLD | $45,000 |
| HUMANE ACTION PENNSYLVANIA | $45,000 |
| NORTHWEST ANIMAL RIGHTS NETWORK (NARN) | $41,000 |
| DC VOTERS FOR ANIMALS EDUCATION FUND | $38,000 |
| MISSOURI ALLIANCE FOR ANIMAL LEGISLATION | $30,000 |
| VOTERS FOR ANIMAL RIGHTS | $30,000 |
| ANIMAL PROTECTION NEW MEXICO | $20,000 |
| COMPASSIONATE ACTION FOR ANIMALS | $18,000 |
| SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF INSECTS | $18,000 |
| SOCIAL COMPASSION IN LEGISLATION | $10,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY21–21, $100k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $3.8M on the FY2025 return
Schedule F, as filed: 6 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: OPERATION SUPPORT IN FURTHERANCE OF CORPORATE CAGE FREE CAMPAIGN WORK
Stated purpose: OPERATION SUPPORT IN FURTHERANCE OF CORPORATE CAGE FREE CAMPAIGN WORK
Stated purpose: OPERATION SUPPORT IN FURTHERANCE OF CORPORATE CAGE FREE CAMPAIGN WORK
Stated purpose: OPERATION SUPPORT IN FURTHERANCE OF CORPORATE CAGE FREE CAMPAIGN WORK
Stated purpose: SUPPORT FOR CORPORATE CAMPAIGN WORK AS WELL AS GENERAL OPERATIONAL SUPPORT
Stated purpose: OPERATION SUPPORT IN FURTHERANCE OF CORPORATE CAGE FREE CAMPAIGN WORK
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +11% since the first grant, against -22% for the ones you 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
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 52% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $165k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- HAHumane Action Pittsburgh2× · 2022–2025 · $120k · revenue +12%
- APANIMAL PROTECTION NEW MEXICO3× · 2022–2025 · $111k · revenue +11%
- MAMISSOURI ALLIANCE FOR ANIMAL LEGISLATION3× · 2022–2025 · $100k · revenue +58%
Funded once
- RPRethink Prioritiesgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue +261%
- AWA Well-Fed Worldone grant, 2022 · $80k · revenue -22%
- PIPROVEG INTERNATIONAL INCone grant, 2023 · $6k · revenue -22%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Exposing and eliminating animal cruelty.
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…
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…
To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.
Prevention of animal cruelty and intervention on behalf of animals being abused.
The Animal Legal Defense Fund Cruelty Prevention Unit's primary mission is to prevent cruelty to animals.
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.
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.
To stop cruelty to animals; to educate the public about animal issues and promote compassion for all animals.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dc Voters for Animals Education Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is Society for the Protection of Insects. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 17 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds Voters for Animal Rights Inc ↗
- Who funds Humane Action Pittsburgh ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL PROTECTION NEW MEXICO ↗
- Who funds Rethink Priorities ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI ALLIANCE FOR ANIMAL LEGISLATION ↗
- Who funds Prevent Cruelty California a Humane Society Committee ↗
- Who funds DC VOTERS FOR ANIMALS INC ↗
- Who funds A Well-Fed World ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL COMPASSION IN LEGISLATION ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DENVER ↗
- Who funds Northwest Animal Rights Network ↗
- Who funds DC VOTERS FOR ANIMALS EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds COMPASSIONATE ACTION FOR ANIMALS ↗
- Who funds SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF INSECTS ↗
- Who funds PROVEG INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Karuna Foundation · Animal Charity Evaluators · The Quinn Foundation · Effective Ventures Foundation USA Inc · Vegfund Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Humane League funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.