Skip to content
Thelma Doelger Trust for Animals at a glance

· Private foundation

Thelma Doelger Trust for Animals

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$410k
Granted FY2025still arriving
21
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Animals$2.7MEnvironment$171kHealth$145kScience & Tech$55kHousing & Shelter$20kOther$0
02FY2025 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k17 grants · $345k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$20,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$7.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY$50,000
HUMANE SOCIETY OF TRUCKEE-TAHOE$35,000
VETS IN VANS$35,000
FRIENDS OF OAKLAND ANIMAL SERVICES$25,000
MARINE MAMMAL CENTER$25,000
CAT TOWN$25,000
SAN FRANCISCO COMMUNITY CLINIC CONSORTIUM$25,000
FIX OUR FERALS$25,000
PASADENA HUMANE$25,000
EAST BAY SPCA$20,000
ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND$20,000
PETS LIFELINE$15,000
COMPASSION WITHOUT BORDERS$15,000
EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE$15,000
WILDCARE$10,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY21–24, $96k) 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%TRI COUNTY WILDLIFE CARE: $41k → 10%Tri County Wildlife Care: $40k → 10%TRI COUNNTY WILDLIFE CARE: $15k → 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.
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.8M · 33 repeat orgs$283k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +42% since the first grant, against +29% for those funded once.

33 repeat relationships: 16 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

33
21

Total granted

$2.8M
$208k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
+29%

Still filing today

97%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $75k 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
AnimalsEnvironmentArts & CultureFood & NutritionHuman ServicesOther
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

  • TM
    THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER
    8× · 2017–2025 · $375k · revenue +63%
  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF TRUCKEE-TAHOE
    7× · 2018–2025 · $180k · revenue +145%
  • IB
    INTERNATIONAL BIRD RESCUE
    5× · 2018–2024 · $180k · revenue +88%

Funded once

  • EM
    EASTERN MADERA COUNTRY SPCA
    one grant, 2018 · $20k
  • PS
    PLACER SCPA
    one grant, 2017 · $20k
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF ALAMEDA ANIMAL SHELTER
    one grant, 2022 · $20k
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
California Animal Rescue and Education Sanctuary Inc

C.A.R.E.S.MISSION STATEMENT*Rescue, foster and find good homes for abandoned and homeless domestic and farm animals.*Spay/neuter abandoned and homeless cats and dogs, as well as help low income families with same.*Conduct TNR+ programs to…

—
2
North Bay Animal Services
Animals
3
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County

The SPCA Monterey County's Mission is assuring compassionate treatment of all animals through rescue, rehabilitation, protection and education. The SPCA shelters homeless, neglected, and abused pets, including dogs, cats, horses, exotic…

Animals
4
Northern California Animal Rescue Friends

We work in cooperation with humane organizations shelters and other groups interested in animal rescue. We rescue domestic animals and place them in nurturing foster homes. All animals are evaluated altered and vaccinated prior to…

Animals
5
Progressive Animal Welfare Society aka Paws

A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.

Animals
6
High Sierra Animal Rescue Inc

High Sierra Animal Rescues mission is to save the lives of homeless dogs in the regions served. Our staff and volunteers are dedicated to making our communities better through successful adoptions advancing their welfare and creating human…

Animals
7
Friends of the Palm SpringsAnimal Shelter

We are dedicated to building a community responsible for pet stewardship and humane treatment of animals.

Animals
8
Animal Rescue of the Rockies

Animal Care and Adoption - ARR's mission is to save the lives of homeless and abandoned dogs and cats. Our goal is reaching a no-kill society in the United States.

Animals
9
Animal Rescue of Fresno

To facilitate and assist in the care and adoption of homeless domestic animals and dissemination of information encouraging spaying and neutering.

Animals
10
World Vets

To improve the health & well-being of animals through veterinary aid, response, training, research & local capacity building worldwide. We provide services to companion animals, horses, street dogs, livestock and marine animals including…

Animals
11
All About Animals Rescue

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

Animals
12
Animal Rescue of Anderson Valley

We are committed to caring for homeless cats and dogs and establishing a no kill community for cats and dogs in Mendocino County, and educating their owners as well as the general populace. Our volunteers provide temporary shelter and…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cat Town; the most unlike its peers is Planet Bee Foundation. 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

52 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. 52 of the 59 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)
20
Early backer (in before they grew)
52/52
Grantees still filing
37/52
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $375,000 · AnimalsTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTERHUMANE SOCIETY OF TRUCKEE-TAHOE: $180,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF TRUCKEE-TAHOEINTERNATIONAL BIRD RESCUE: $180,000 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL BIRD RESCUECAT TOWN: $180,000 · AnimalsCAT TOWNFRIENDS OF THE PALO ALTO JUNIOR MUSEUM & ZOO: $150,000 · AnimalsFRIENDS OF THE PALO ALTO JUNIOR MUSEUM & ZOOHUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $150,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTYPets Lifeline Inc: $110,000 · AnimalsMUTTVILLE: $105,000 · AnimalsFIX OUR FERALS: $105,000 · AnimalsEAST BAY SPCA: $90,000 · AnimalsThe Placer County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals SPCA: $85,000 · AnimalsANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $80,000 · Animals+28 more: $517,500 · Animals+28 moreSan Francisco Community Clinic Consortium: $145,000 · OtherSan Francisco C…Gold Country Wildlife Rescue Inc: $85,000 · OtherGold Country Wi…WILDLIFE ASSOCIATES: $56,000 · OtherWILDLIFE ASSOCI…EASTERN MADERA COUNTRY SPCA: $20,000 · OtherPLACER SCPA: $20,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF ALAMEDA ANIMAL SHELTER: $20,000 · OtherDwight Center for Conservation Science at Pepperwood: $15,000 · Other+6 more: $50,500 · Other+6 moreEarth Island Institute Inc: $80,000 · EnvironmentPEPPERWOOD FOUNDATION: $63,000 · EnvironmentTRI COUNTY WILDLIFE CARE INC: $95,534 · Human ServicesCURIODYSSEY: $55,000 · Arts & CultureLINDSAY WILDLIFE MUSEUM: $40,000 · Arts & CulturePLANET BEE FOUNDATION: $2,500 · Food & Nutrition
Animals$2,307,500Other$411,500Environment$143,000Human Services$95,534Arts & Culture$95,000Food & Nutrition$2,500

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 MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $375,000 over 8y, 0.5% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF TRUCKEE-TAHOE: $180,000 over 7y, 2.8% of budgetINTERNATIONAL BIRD RESCUE: $180,000 over 5y, 2.4% of budgetCAT TOWN: $180,000 over 7y, 3.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE PALO ALTO JUNIOR MUSEUM & ZOO: $150,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $150,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetSan Francisco Community Clinic Consortium: $145,000 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetPets Lifeline Inc: $110,000 over 4y, 2.4% of budgetMUTTVILLE: $105,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetFIX OUR FERALS: $105,000 over 5y, 3.0% of budgetTRI COUNTY WILDLIFE CARE INC: $95,534 over 3y, 20% of budgetEAST BAY SPCA: $90,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetGold Country Wildlife Rescue Inc: $85,000 over 7y, 2.5% of budgetThe Placer County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals SPCA: $85,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc: $80,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $80,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetPEPPERWOOD FOUNDATION: $63,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetVETS IN VANS INC: $60,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetCURIODYSSEY: $55,000 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetTHE BIRD RESCUE CENTER: $52,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetPOINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY: $50,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetLINDSAY WILDLIFE MUSEUM: $40,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetWildcare Eastern Sierra: $36,000 over 5y, 6.9% of budgetTOWN CATS OF MORGAN HILL: $35,000 over 5y, 2.0% of budgetCOMPASSION WITHOUT BORDERS: $30,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetCONTRA COSTA HUMANE SOCIETY: $25,000 over 5y, 1.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF OAKLAND ANIMAL SERVICES: $25,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetNine Lives Foundation: $20,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetHUMBOLDT SPAYNEUTER NETWORK: $17,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ALAMEDA ANIMAL SHELTER: $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFieldHaven Feline Center: $15,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetValley Humane SocietyInc: $15,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetSILICON VALLEY PET PROJECT: $13,000 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetANIMALS IN NEED FUND: $12,500 over 2y, 7.4% of budgetWILDCARE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSIERRA WILDLIFE RESCUE: $10,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetOSCAR'S PLACE ADOPTION CENTER & SANCTUARY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHIGH PLATEAU HUMANE SOCIETY: $10,000 over 1y, 8.8% of budgetCONSERVATION EARTH INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetSPAY NEUTER IMPERATIVE PROJECT CALIFORNIA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetWILDLIFE CENTER OF SILICON VALLEY: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetBUTTE HUMANE SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAnimal Refugee Response: $5,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetTRINITY ANIMAL SHELTER AUXILARY TASA: $5,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetJELLYS PLACE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBandits Buddies Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetPets In Need: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPLANET BEE FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 2.2% 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.

Thornton S Jr and Kat…The Duffield Family F…Petsmart Charities IncPetco LoveMarin Community Found…BISSELL Pet FoundationThe American Society …McNabb FoundationThe Grey Muzzle Organ…The Michelson Found A…Silicon Valley Commun…Best Friends Animal S…
Thornton S Jr and Katrina D Glide FoundationCA66.5× affinity30 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Thornton S Jr and Katrina D Glide Foundation · The Duffield Family Foundation Dba Maddie's Fund · Petsmart Charities Inc · Petco Love · Marin Community Foundation · BISSELL Pet Foundation · The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals · McNabb Foundation · The Grey Muzzle Organization · The Michelson Found Animals Foundation Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Best Friends Animal Society

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 Thelma Doelger Trust for Animals funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Thelma Doelger Trust for Animals. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    13report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 Thelma Doelger Trust for Animals?

    Find your warmest path to Thelma Doelger Trust for Animals 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 59 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 Thelma Doelger Trust for Animals’ 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