The definition we use is an organization’s attempts to influence legislation. We are not able to fund activities to attempt to influence the outcome of any specific public election; or to carry out directly or indirectly, any voter registration drive.
ACE does have a limit on the amount of lobbying work that we are able to fund. However, this limit is across our total disbursed funds. Applicants should not be concerned when applying about this limit.
Great job! Our best wishes for this year to be just as efficient, and our admiration. One of the biggest challenges for us has been communicating all the work we do. Sometimes we get so immersed in our tasks that we forget to share updates with our peers. Thanks for sharing—we'll check out The Mission Motor!
Great job! Our best wishes for this year to be just as efficient, and our admiration. One of the biggest challenges for us has been communicating all the work we do. Sometimes we get so immersed in our tasks that we forget to share updates with our peers. Thanks for sharing—we'll check out The Mission Motor!
Hi Carol, thank you for the great work you do to help animals! As much as we’d love to help every animal, ACE doesn’t currently prioritize organizations and projects working in direct animal care (rescue and rehabilitation) as we focus on more large-scale advocacy work (for example, see our recent grant recipients). In this instance, we would be open to hearing more about your education work (if this is directed toward a large number of people) or your work in advocating for policy change. We ideally want to see work that is scalable and has the potential to affect a large number of animals. I hope this helps.
Hi Jane, thank you for your question and for the great work that you’re doing! We are open to receiving an Expression of Interest from UnchainedTV. A strong application would need to clearly demonstrate how your streaming TV network leads to meaningful change for animals. For example, how does it go beyond raising awareness? Can you provide evidence that your content leads to tangible outcomes for animals? Is this work scalable? And if so, how?
One thing that would be particularly interesting is if you could propose a plan to, or provide evidence for, your content reaching non-vegans and how this impacts them. If you decide to apply, outlining a clear theory of change and providing examples of how your work will be different from existing work will be helpful.
Thanks so much Holly. We are precisely targeting non-vegans who are generally not exposed to the vegan message by distributing to platforms that are not associated with veganism at all, but are primarily serving a global population looking for free-to-watch television. We also appear on PBS stations around the US, on Gusto TV - the "world's best food network" - and on In The Black Network and other platforms that are not vegan oriented. And, scalable is our focus as well which is why we've launched a FAST channel that can be picked up by platforms globally. We will definitely apply! Thanks, Jane
Hello, thank you for your question. Yes, we are open to applications focused on a particular demographic within a wider population such as the Mexican-American community. In your application, we would need to see how you plan to strategically target this population so that you are able to have an impact at scale.
Thank you so much for all the great questions! Also, thanks to David van Beveren and the FAST Forum for hosting this AMA. It looks like we've answered all of your questions so we'll be signing off for now. Feel free to submit more questions if you have them—we'll keep an eye on this thread and try to respond over the next couple of days and then will close it.
If you'd like to support highly promising projects working to reduce animal suffering around the world, make a gift to our Movement Grants today.
I’m Darleen from Plant Futures, a US- and Mexico-based organization dedicated to advancing animal rights, education, and workforce development. Our mission is to equip students with the skills, resources, and community support necessary to transition into a more just and sustainable food system.
We are looking to scale our work in Mexico across three core areas:
- Education & Curriculum Development - Professional & Career Development - Campus Advocacy & Student Chapters
Which of these areas would you be most likely to fund?
Hi Darleen, thank you for reaching out and for the work you’re doing with Plant Futures. All of the areas you mention are within the scope of the Movement Grants program. Given your experience working in Mexico, you likely have insights into which area is the most pressing or has the highest potential impact right now, and I recommend that you submit your proposal on that basis. Alternatively, if you think that the programs have synergies that mean they should be implemented at the same time, you could apply for general operating funds for all your work in Mexico.
We are a an educational project founded by teachers and we basically do talks in schools and seminars for teacher's training as well as educational materials promoting respect and consideration for animals.
I had some questions regarding some tips in order to write a good Expression of Interest but you already answered them, so thank you very much in advanced : )
Anyway, I have some doubts:
After almost 15 years of activism, for the first time this year we applied for a another grant and we are are currently doing a collaborative funded project.When will this Movement Grants will start? We just want to know if there is any type of incompatibility considering the times and deadlines os these new grants.
During all these years we have carried out our activities absolutely voluntarily and we are committed to continue with our project. My question is: When we write the application, what is best? Should we detail the specific activities in a concrete way that we would like to develop with this grant or maybe its better a detailed description of the activities that we have carried out in recent years so that ACE could get a full picture of our project and the work we do?
Hi Pilar, thank you for your 15 years of dedication for animals!
This year we will have two funding rounds. We expect the first round of grants will be disbursed in May and June, and the second round of grants will be disbursed in December and January.
If you decide to complete an Expression of Interest, please focus on what you intend to use the grant funds for. If you are invited to complete a full application, there will be a question about your achievements in previous years where you can outline your recent accomplishments. You can also learn more in this video.
Thank you for this opportunity. We would like to know if you are interested in supporting university-led research projects that aim to address issues of protection and welfare by studying the behavior and cognition of invertebrates. Thanks.
Hi Cinzia, thank you for your question and this work sounds very interesting! We don’t fund academic research unless there is a clear dissemination plan that goes beyond publishing the work in academic journals. We would like to know how you’ll create information value that can be used by animal advocates and lead to impact for animals. Without such a plan, we would be hesitant to award funding. Another factor we take into consideration is that academic research often has other sources of funding (e.g. through government grants or other academic funders) so we prioritize work that is unlikely to be funded by other means. I hope this provides more clarification.
Hello, I would like to apply for a grant. UnchainedTV is the brand of our nonprofit media company. We are the world's only free, nonprofit streaming TV network for the plant-based lifestyle, producing, acquiring and distributing award-winning documentaries, vegan cooking shows, biographies and breaking news. Often called the CNN/Netflix of veganism, UnchainedTV is now expanding distribution globally via FAST and VOD channels. Our goal is to do an end-run around the mainstream media blackout on the vegan movement. I founded this nonprofit after 30 years reporting in mainstream media, including at CNN and Disney. Is this something that would appeal to Animal Charity Evaluators and what are your suggestions to focus on in our application? Best, Jane Velez-Mitchell, Founder UnchainedTV (janeunchained news network is the name of the 501c3 EIN 82-3892784)
Hi Jane, thank you for your question and for the great work that you’re doing! We are open to receiving an Expression of Interest from UnchainedTV. A strong application would need to clearly demonstrate how your streaming TV network leads to meaningful change for animals. For example, how does it go beyond raising awareness? Can you provide evidence that your content leads to tangible outcomes for animals? Is this work scalable? And if so, how?
One thing that would be particularly interesting is if you could propose a plan to, or provide evidence for, your content reaching non-vegans and how this impacts them. If you decide to apply, outlining a clear theory of change and providing examples of how your work will be different from existing work will be helpful.
I’m Darleen from Plant Futures, a US- and Mexico-based organization dedicated to advancing animal rights, education, and workforce development. Our mission is to equip students with the skills, resources, and community support necessary to transition into a more just and sustainable food system.
We are looking to scale our work in Mexico across three core areas:
- Education & Curriculum Development - Professional & Career Development - Campus Advocacy & Student Chapters
Which of these areas would you be most likely to fund?
Hello and thank you so much for this space. We received funding from another grant provider with the condition that we secure an amount of matching grant. Do you offer matching grants?
Hi Morgan, ACE does not offer matching grants in the sense that we do not require grantees to secure additional funding as a condition of our grants. However, if an organization has received a grant from another funder that requires matching funds, an ACE grant can be used to fulfill that requirement—unless the other funder has specific restrictions that prevent this.
I’m working alongside an incredible team of changemakers and visionaries to launch a groundbreaking multi-day event aligned with the ACE mission. This immersive experience is designed to revolutionize the movement by fusing cutting-edge technology, music, arts, and solution-driven concepts to create powerful, deeply personal engagement.
With a focus on accessibility, innovation, and cultural impact, this event will:
✅ Advance skill-building and training programs ✅ Foster collaborative networks ✅ Empower grassroots leadership ✅ Showcase groundbreaking solutions for planetary, animal, and nature protection ✅ Inspire individuals to step into action
This initiative is deeply committed to strengthening eco-social justice issues, including the animal advocacy movement. Through a dynamic range of platforms, it amplifies awareness, fuels community-driven action, and equips advocates with cutting-edge tools, resources and a variety of support to create lasting change—for animals, people, and the planet.
Is this something ACE would fund to help get off the ground? Please let me know if you have any questions to help further render a determination.
Thank you for your question—it sounds like an exciting initiative. For a proposal like this, we would need to understand how the event would lead to meaningful change for a large number of animals. Specifically, we’d be interested in whether the event is targeting influential individuals within the movement, how it differs from or complements existing initiatives, and what concrete outcomes it aims to achieve.
If you decide to submit an expression of interest, providing specific examples of expected outcomes would strengthen your proposal.
Thank you for this opportunity. We would like to know if you are interested in supporting university-led research projects that aim to address issues of protection and welfare by studying the behavior and cognition of invertebrates. Thanks.
Since our process is application-based, it’s difficult to predict exactly which projects will be funded—it depends on the proposals we receive. Our portfolio this round is likely to look similar to the previous round. There are also a few areas where we would like to have seen more applications last round. In particular, we’d like to see more proposals focused on support for egg-laying hens, given the strong track record of corporate welfare campaigns in many different countries. We also didn’t fund any entirely wild animal-focused projects last round, and we’d like to see more applications from Southeast Asia, which remains significantly underfunded.
EOIs should be short and to the point –they are much less detailed than the application. A strong EOI clearly describes the planned activities, target groups, animal populations being helped, and how the intervention creates impact. We should be able to quickly understand the scale of the project and its potential effects.
Common mistakes include:
Applicants misinterpreting questions or not answering as we would have expected them to. Most questions have an (i) icon next to it with additional guidance on what we’re looking for.
Attaching or linking to extra documents instead of properly answering application questions.
Insufficient desk research, particularly, new organizations sometimes miss key risks because they haven’t fully explored the context or intervention.
Improper use of AI, in particular, some applicants generate entire sections with AI without checking for accuracy or relevance. We tend to find that AI AI-generated plans and budgets usually don’t make sense, and this resulted in a number of rejected applications last round.
We assess effectiveness on a case-by-case basis, depending on the intervention and the stage of the project (e.g., pilot, scaling, or full implementation). We start with what the applicant states they aim to achieve and how they plan to measure it. Based on this, we identify additional reporting requirements and share them with the grant recipient early on in the grant period, allowing them to provide feedback if they believe other metrics would be more useful. We are in the early stages of implementing our own Measurement, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) in the Movement Grants program, which will include what we learn from our grant reporting to understand our own impact. We hope to share how this is going towards the end of the year.
We don’t have a strict cap on grant amounts, but we expect funding sizes to be in line with previous rounds. The average grant size last year was $37,397 USD including a Movement Grant recommendation that ACE did not disburse.
Since our process is application-based, it’s difficult to predict exactly which projects will be funded—it depends on the proposals we receive. Our portfolio this round is likely to look similar to the previous round. There are also a few areas where we would like to have seen more applications last round. In particular, we’d like to see more proposals focused on support for egg-laying hens, given the strong track record of corporate welfare campaigns in many different countries. We also didn’t fund any entirely wild animal-focused projects last round, and we’d like to see more applications from Southeast Asia, which remains significantly underfunded.
EOIs should be short and to the point –they are much less detailed than the application. A strong EOI clearly describes the planned activities, target groups, animal populations being helped, and how the intervention creates impact. We should be able to quickly understand the scale of the project and its potential effects.
Common mistakes include:
Applicants misinterpreting questions or not answering as we would have expected them to. Most questions have an (i) icon next to it with additional guidance on what we’re looking for.
Attaching or linking to extra documents instead of properly answering application questions.
Insufficient desk research, particularly, new organizations sometimes miss key risks because they haven’t fully explored the context or intervention.
Improper use of AI, in particular, some applicants generate entire sections with AI without checking for accuracy or relevance. We tend to find that AI AI-generated plans and budgets usually don’t make sense, and this resulted in a number of rejected applications last round.
We assess effectiveness on a case-by-case basis, depending on the intervention and the stage of the project (e.g., pilot, scaling, or full implementation). We start with what the applicant states they aim to achieve and how they plan to measure it. Based on this, we identify additional reporting requirements and share them with the grant recipient early on in the grant period, allowing them to provide feedback if they believe other metrics would be more useful. We are in the early stages of implementing our own Measurement, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) in the Movement Grants program, which will include what we learn from our grant reporting to understand our own impact. We hope to share how this is going towards the end of the year.
We don’t have a strict cap on grant amounts, but we expect funding sizes to be in line with previous rounds. The average grant size last year was $37,397 USD including a Movement Grant recommendation that ACE did not disburse.
We would be open to receiving an Expression of Interest from your organization. Research on the impact of documentaries is mixed—while some films have had outsized effects, reported impact varies significantly by country and context. Because of this, our team is somewhat uncertain about documentaries as an intervention overall, meaning a strong application would need to clearly demonstrate how the films and their distribution would lead to meaningful outcomes for animals.
We’d be particularly interested in how this project would go beyond raising awareness to create concrete impact, whether through policy change, movement-building, or direct improvements for animals. If you decide to apply, outlining a clear theory of change and providing examples of how similar initiatives have led to measurable outcomes would strengthen your application.
We are a an educational project founded by teachers and we basically do talks in schools and seminars for teacher's training as well as educational materials promoting respect and consideration for animals.
I had some questions regarding some tips in order to write a good Expression of Interest but you already answered them, so thank you very much in advanced : )
Anyway, I have some doubts:
After almost 15 years of activism, for the first time this year we applied for a another grant and we are are currently doing a collaborative funded project.When will this Movement Grants will start? We just want to know if there is any type of incompatibility considering the times and deadlines os these new grants.
During all these years we have carried out our activities absolutely voluntarily and we are committed to continue with our project. My question is: When we write the application, what is best? Should we detail the specific activities in a concrete way that we would like to develop with this grant or maybe its better a detailed description of the activities that we have carried out in recent years so that ACE could get a full picture of our project and the work we do?
Hi Eleanor, Elisabeth and Holly, and thanks for doing this.
I’m working with Fauna Films on a short-film fellowship concept that would use our filmmaking expertise to spotlight under-resourced animal advocacy groups in the Global South. Our goal is to help them document their work and their stories in a way that raises awareness, ideally fosters institutional change, and builds capacity, especially in communities that often go unheard. Would a storytelling-focused initiative like this, aimed at amplifying local advocates and campaigns, align with the priorities for ACE’s Movement Grants? Is this something you'd at all consider in the current round?
We would be open to receiving an Expression of Interest from your organization. Research on the impact of documentaries is mixed—while some films have had outsized effects, reported impact varies significantly by country and context. Because of this, our team is somewhat uncertain about documentaries as an intervention overall, meaning a strong application would need to clearly demonstrate how the films and their distribution would lead to meaningful outcomes for animals.
We’d be particularly interested in how this project would go beyond raising awareness to create concrete impact, whether through policy change, movement-building, or direct improvements for animals. If you decide to apply, outlining a clear theory of change and providing examples of how similar initiatives have led to measurable outcomes would strengthen your application.
Thank you for this opportunity. I am working with an organization with a mission to rescue and rehabilitate farmed animals from abuse, neglect, and abandonment, provide humane education with a focus on veganism, rehabilitate wildlife, and advocate for policy changes to benefit animals. Very much looking forward to applying for grant funding.
Hi Carol, thank you for the great work you do to help animals! As much as we’d love to help every animal, ACE doesn’t currently prioritize organizations and projects working in direct animal care (rescue and rehabilitation) as we focus on more large-scale advocacy work (for example, see our recent grant recipients). In this instance, we would be open to hearing more about your education work (if this is directed toward a large number of people) or your work in advocating for policy change. We ideally want to see work that is scalable and has the potential to affect a large number of animals. I hope this helps.
Hi Amruza, yes, capacity building working is within the scope of the program. You can find the full Movement Grants eligibility criteria here on our website under the FAQs: What are we interested in funding? What are we not interested in funding?
Appreciate you all hosting this AMA. I do have three questions related to what grants ACE might be open to considering.
1. Is there a time when ACE might consider funding ballot initiative proposals that go further in their ask than the initiatives we saw in 2024?
2. What impact from ballot initiatives would ACE consider worthwhile? And are there specific metrics you would be hoping campaigns use to measure their impact?
3. Are there other ways ACE may be interested in supporting ballot initiative campaigns that they may not choose to fund directly?
We don’t have predetermined criteria for which ballot measures we would or wouldn’t fund, and proposals are assessed on a case-by-case basis. That said, 3 out of the 4 U.S. measures run in 2024 were unsuccessful, including the Denver fur ban, which we expected to perform better. Given that, we are more pessimistic that more radical measures can be achieved through ballot initiatives. We supported ProAnimal Future and Sentient Politics in part to capture insights from those campaigns, which will inform our future grantmaking. Beyond the ask we also take into consideration the opposition to the measure, the political and media environment, and current public sentiment.
Perhaps it goes without saying that our ideal proposal is a campaign with a reasonable likelihood of success and a measure that would create a meaningful positive impact for animals. We do also consider broader movement-building effects, such as engaging and training new advocates or shifting public attitudes toward animals. We would expect applicants to propose the most relevant impact metrics, particularly if they believe success should be measured beyond a campaign win.
While we prioritize promoting the work of our recommended charities and grantees, we are open to hearing from other organizations that are doing high-impact work and/or have interesting learnings that could help others for our guest blog. For example, you can submit a guest blog proposal for writing about movement-level strategies, potentially impactful interventions, and discussions of interventions or strategies between experts from different angles. You can read more about what we publish on this page under “blog submission.”
Hello, I would like to apply for a grant. UnchainedTV is the brand of our nonprofit media company. We are the world's only free, nonprofit streaming TV network for the plant-based lifestyle, producing, acquiring and distributing award-winning documentaries, vegan cooking shows, biographies and breaking news. Often called the CNN/Netflix of veganism, UnchainedTV is now expanding distribution globally via FAST and VOD channels. Our goal is to do an end-run around the mainstream media blackout on the vegan movement. I founded this nonprofit after 30 years reporting in mainstream media, including at CNN and Disney. Is this something that would appeal to Animal Charity Evaluators and what are your suggestions to focus on in our application? Best, Jane Velez-Mitchell, Founder UnchainedTV (janeunchained news network is the name of the 501c3 EIN 82-3892784)
Thank you for this session. What are the metrics of success you use when assessing potential projects? Do you accept proposals that incorporate regranting to other relevant actors in the movement?
We assess effectiveness on a case-by-case basis, depending on the intervention and the stage of the project (e.g., pilot, scaling, or full implementation). We start with what the applicant states they aim to achieve and how they plan to measure it. Based on this, we identify additional reporting requirements and share them with the grant recipient early on in the grant period, allowing them to provide feedback if they believe other metrics would be more useful. We are in the early stages of implementing our own Measurement, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) in the Movement Grants program, which will include what we learn from our grant reporting to understand our own impact. We hope to share how this is going towards the end of the year.
At this time, we are not considering applications for regranting, as we are a regranting organization ourselves. However, if you know of a regranter playing an important role in the movement, we’d be happy to hear about them—we may be able to share their information within our network.
Hello and thank you for hosting this informative space. Would you all consider funding to reach a certain demographic in the US? We are a new org that focuses on outreach to the Mexican-American community.
Hello, thank you for your question. Yes, we are open to applications focused on a particular demographic within a wider population such as the Mexican-American community. In your application, we would need to see how you plan to strategically target this population so that you are able to have an impact at scale.
One exciting trend is the increase in climate funders supporting a reduction in animal agriculture through dietary change and alt proteins as climate mitigation. Just last week the Bezos Centre for Sustainable Protein opened at Imperial College London with $30M in funding. This shift could open up a lot of funding opportunities for organizations that are currently solely reliant on funding from funders concerned with the welfare of animals.
I enjoy reading applications from new organizations the most –that’s not to say they are more/less likely to get funding– but it is such a pleasure to see the dedication and bravery it takes to start something new. Even more so, when I see they are working in a country where there is a nascent animal advocacy movement.
I would like to see some applicants include a bit more detail on the context in which they are working, in particular, whether there are political, social, or economic factors that might impact their work. Similarly, for some niche species-specific work, it is useful for our grant review team if you include the animal science research you are relying on.
My name is Abir Gitlin, and I’m a PhD student (Environmental Studies and International Relations) at the Hebrew University in Israel.
My research focuses on how political ideology shapes responses to meat reduction messaging (in the US and Israel), with the goal of designing effective interventions that promote policy support and behavioral change.
My questions are: does ACE fund academic research that aims to promote social change on meat consumption? If so, what kinds of costs are typically covered under Movement Grants, and what criteria do you prioritize when evaluating research proposals?
Thanks for doing this interesting work, Abir. We don’t fund academic research like this unless there is a clear dissemination plan that goes beyond publishing the work in academic journals. We want to know how you’ll create information value that can be used by animal advocates and lead to impact for animals, so without such a plan in place we would be very hesitant to award funding. An additional factor is that academic research often has other sources of funding (e.g. through government grants or other academic funders) so we prioritize funding work that is unlikely to be funded by other means.
Hello and thank you so much for this space. We received funding from another grant provider with the condition that we secure an amount of matching grant. Do you offer matching grants?
Hello. This is my first time approaching and considering applying for a grant from ACE. I wanted to know if you accept grants for salaries of employees and if you fund projects from US citizens who want to do outreach work in other countries. Thank you.
Yes, in some cases we’ll fund operating costs like salaries, depending on the type and strength of the application, and the operating budget of the organization that the employee works at. We’ll also fund projects from U.S. citizens who want to do outreach work in other countries; however, we take seriously the importance of our grantees understanding the cultural context of their work, so we’d need to see in the application some kind of evidence of “right fit” for the person doing the work. For general outreach work, we’d also need to see evidence of a strategically developed approach that has the capacity to reach people at scale and track relevant outcomes.
I’m working alongside an incredible team of changemakers and visionaries to launch a groundbreaking multi-day event aligned with the ACE mission. This immersive experience is designed to revolutionize the movement by fusing cutting-edge technology, music, arts, and solution-driven concepts to create powerful, deeply personal engagement.
With a focus on accessibility, innovation, and cultural impact, this event will:
✅ Advance skill-building and training programs ✅ Foster collaborative networks ✅ Empower grassroots leadership ✅ Showcase groundbreaking solutions for planetary, animal, and nature protection ✅ Inspire individuals to step into action
This initiative is deeply committed to strengthening eco-social justice issues, including the animal advocacy movement. Through a dynamic range of platforms, it amplifies awareness, fuels community-driven action, and equips advocates with cutting-edge tools, resources and a variety of support to create lasting change—for animals, people, and the planet.
Is this something ACE would fund to help get off the ground? Please let me know if you have any questions to help further render a determination.
Thanks for this opportunity! I am asking on behalf of Switch4Good, are you excited to fund federal legislation, corporate policy change (like Starbucks and Tim Horton's recently dropping the upcharge for plant-based milk), governmental policy change (like the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the Women’s, Infants and Children’s Program) and/or effective digital campaigns to help upend the Ultra Processed Food myth? Thank you again for your consideration.
Thank you for your question! Federal legislation, corporate policy change, and governmental policy change all have the potential to have a huge impact based on the change that is being called for and the likelihood of success. For each of the ideas you have suggested, we would like to hear what your expected outcomes are, how you’re tracking them, and how you expect those outcomes to have downstream impacts for animals e.g., did removing the surcharge for plant-based milks in Starbucks result in a significant reduction in dairy milk consumption? We are currently highly uncertain about the impact of digital campaigns, but find they can be impactful as part of a wider campaign utilizing multiple tactics—it will be interesting to learn more about the impact you are hoping to see with your UPF campaign!
Since our process is application-based, it’s difficult to predict exactly which projects will be funded—it depends on the proposals we receive. Our portfolio this round is likely to look similar to the previous round. There are also a few areas where we would like to have seen more applications last round. In particular, we’d like to see more proposals focused on support for egg-laying hens, given the strong track record of corporate welfare campaigns in many different countries. We also didn’t fund any entirely wild animal-focused projects last round, and we’d like to see more applications from Southeast Asia, which remains significantly underfunded.
EOIs should be short and to the point –they are much less detailed than the application. A strong EOI clearly describes the planned activities, target groups, animal populations being helped, and how the intervention creates impact. We should be able to quickly understand the scale of the project and its potential effects.
Common mistakes include:
Applicants misinterpreting questions or not answering as we would have expected them to. Most questions have an (i) icon next to it with additional guidance on what we’re looking for.
Attaching or linking to extra documents instead of properly answering application questions.
Insufficient desk research, particularly, new organizations sometimes miss key risks because they haven’t fully explored the context or intervention.
Improper use of AI, in particular, some applicants generate entire sections with AI without checking for accuracy or relevance. We tend to find that AI AI-generated plans and budgets usually don’t make sense, and this resulted in a number of rejected applications last round.
We assess effectiveness on a case-by-case basis, depending on the intervention and the stage of the project (e.g., pilot, scaling, or full implementation). We start with what the applicant states they aim to achieve and how they plan to measure it. Based on this, we identify additional reporting requirements and share them with the grant recipient early on in the grant period, allowing them to provide feedback if they believe other metrics would be more useful. We are in the early stages of implementing our own Measurement, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) in the Movement Grants program, which will include what we learn from our grant reporting to understand our own impact. We hope to share how this is going towards the end of the year.
We don’t have a strict cap on grant amounts, but we expect funding sizes to be in line with previous rounds. The average grant size last year was $37,397 USD including a Movement Grant recommendation that ACE did not disburse.
Hi Eleanor, Elisabeth and Holly, and thanks for doing this.
I’m working with Fauna Films on a short-film fellowship concept that would use our filmmaking expertise to spotlight under-resourced animal advocacy groups in the Global South. Our goal is to help them document their work and their stories in a way that raises awareness, ideally fosters institutional change, and builds capacity, especially in communities that often go unheard. Would a storytelling-focused initiative like this, aimed at amplifying local advocates and campaigns, align with the priorities for ACE’s Movement Grants? Is this something you'd at all consider in the current round?
My name is Abir Gitlin, and I’m a PhD student (Environmental Studies and International Relations) at the Hebrew University in Israel.
My research focuses on how political ideology shapes responses to meat reduction messaging (in the US and Israel), with the goal of designing effective interventions that promote policy support and behavioral change.
My questions are: does ACE fund academic research that aims to promote social change on meat consumption? If so, what kinds of costs are typically covered under Movement Grants, and what criteria do you prioritize when evaluating research proposals?
Hello and thank you for hosting this informative space. Would you all consider funding to reach a certain demographic in the US? We are a new org that focuses on outreach to the Mexican-American community.
Thank you for this session. What are the metrics of success you use when assessing potential projects? Do you accept proposals that incorporate regranting to other relevant actors in the movement?
Sub-Saharan Africa includes many countries and contexts, so I am reluctant to make any sweeping statements about what are the most impactful areas for such a large region, but I will try to offer some useful thoughts.
There has been relatively little advocacy work in the region, so if I were to advise groups on what they might focus on, I would start by looking at what interventions have been the most impactful in other parts of the world, and focus on how one might adapt such approaches to the new context. For instance, higher rates of informal markets, or norms around communication might be different, this would lead to significant changes in how you might implement an intervention that has been successful in other parts of the world.
Another angle would be to look at what interventions have uniquely worked well in your country for other (non-animal) issues, and if you could test whether these interventions could be used to benefit animals.
The current and predicted rate of animal farming and consumption vary greatly between countries within sub-Saharan Africa so it is possible that if you have the freedom to move and work in different countries (I appreciate this is a privilege many don’t have), you may find that you can be more impactful in your work.
I am not an expert in advocacy in this region, so I would love to see in the replies what others think!
Hello. This is my first time approaching and considering applying for a grant from ACE. I wanted to know if you accept grants for salaries of employees and if you fund projects from US citizens who want to do outreach work in other countries. Thank you.
Appreciate you all hosting this AMA. I do have three questions related to what grants ACE might be open to considering.
1. Is there a time when ACE might consider funding ballot initiative proposals that go further in their ask than the initiatives we saw in 2024?
2. What impact from ballot initiatives would ACE consider worthwhile? And are there specific metrics you would be hoping campaigns use to measure their impact?
3. Are there other ways ACE may be interested in supporting ballot initiative campaigns that they may not choose to fund directly?
Thanks for this opportunity! I am asking on behalf of Switch4Good, are you excited to fund federal legislation, corporate policy change (like Starbucks and Tim Horton's recently dropping the upcharge for plant-based milk), governmental policy change (like the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the Women’s, Infants and Children’s Program) and/or effective digital campaigns to help upend the Ultra Processed Food myth? Thank you again for your consideration.
Thank you for this opportunity. I am working with an organization with a mission to rescue and rehabilitate farmed animals from abuse, neglect, and abandonment, provide humane education with a focus on veganism, rehabilitate wildlife, and advocate for policy changes to benefit animals. Very much looking forward to applying for grant funding.
The Humane League is doing impactful work on behalf of animals. I'll be sending my resume your way. Wishing you the best of luck finding the perfect candidate.
I enjoyed watching the video and looking through the fbi presentation! The "Domestic Terrorism / Weapons of Mass Destruction" slide made me laugh. It looks like a meme...
Supporting impactful diet-change projects is such a meaningful initiative! If you’re applying, consider exploring complementary ideas like integrating wellness benefits. For example, pairing plant-based advocacy with health boosters like hydrogen water might resonate with audiences.
Hey there! Thank you so much for your work! A couple of questions:
- Do you have an explicit method on how you arrive at whether a charity is being recommended based on the "scores"/evaluations they receive on your different criteria? I.e., do they need to clear a certain bar in every criteria, are some criteria (say, Impact) weighted more than others (say Organizational Health), is there a "total sum" that needs to be exceeded, etc.?
- Are there/do you intend to publish more detailed reviews of the charities that were not recommended?
- After having revised the methodology quite a bit, what are some areas in your new methodology that you are uncertain about and why?
We don’t have a certain bar per criterion that charities need to meet to be recommended. It’s the totality of our assessments across all the criteria that add up to our judgment call on whether a charity is marginally cost-effective enough to be recommended. The weighting of the criteria can differ from charity to charity depending on things like the interventions they use, whether they have direct or indirect impact, whether they operate on a short- or long-term theory of change, the level of uncertainty we have, the availability of data that allows us to calculate impact per dollar, and other factors. We arrive at our recommendation decisions through iterative team discussion and a set of scores. You can learn more about our recommendations decisions and guiding questions on our Evaluation Process page.
In 2023 we began not publishing comprehensive reviews for charities that are evaluated but that we don’t give Recommended Charity status to. This is because in addition to being an evaluator, ACE is a meta-fundraiser and we directly promote the charities we recommend. In the shorter summary reviews for the charities we evaluate but we don’t give Recommended Charity status to, we still share many of the details that were relevant to inform our decision (e.g., the theory of change table).
It’s a great question about where we have uncertainties in our new methods. First, we found our attempt to estimate Suffering Adjusted Days (SADs) averted per dollar less useful and more uncertain than we expected. We had hoped to be able to estimate SADs averted per dollar for the key programs of all the charities we evaluated this year, but that didn’t end up being possible, largely due to either the types of data charities collect to monitor their own programs or the general lack of empirical evidence about the effectiveness of animal advocacy interventions. The new theory of change assessment really helped with this because the corresponding analysis of how we expect charities’ activities and outputs to lead to outcomes and impact helped reduce a lot of our uncertainty, and helped give us a deeper understanding of each charity’s work (and aims). Second, we were uncertain about what research our team needed to do ahead of the evaluation season to best prepare us for the implementation of our new methods. We ended up doing a lot of research during the evaluation period, which included reaching out to external experts. While there will always be charity-specific research for us to do, I think we’re now in a better position to anticipate many of our research needs ahead of time. Lastly, some internal logistical processes created a bit of uncertainty among team members about roles, responsibilities and workflows that were hard to anticipate when rolling out the new methodology, but we have had regular retrospective meetings after each stage of our process so we know how to address all those internal sticking points in the future.
Hey there! Thank you so much for your work! A couple of questions:
- Do you have an explicit method on how you arrive at whether a charity is being recommended based on the "scores"/evaluations they receive on your different criteria? I.e., do they need to clear a certain bar in every criteria, are some criteria (say, Impact) weighted more than others (say Organizational Health), is there a "total sum" that needs to be exceeded, etc.?
- Are there/do you intend to publish more detailed reviews of the charities that were not recommended?
- After having revised the methodology quite a bit, what are some areas in your new methodology that you are uncertain about and why?
Thank you for the great questions! It looks like we've answered all of them so we'll be signing off for now. Feel free to submit more questions if you have them—we'll keep an eye on this thread and try to respond later in the week. As always, if you have any questions about our work, you can also reach out to us on email via our website.
If you’re looking for impactful giving opportunities for animals this giving season, for a limited time, all donations to our Recommended Charity Fund will be matched! Your support will help all 11 of our Recommended Charities that we estimate will have an exceptional impact for animals with additional donations.
How many counterfactual donations have the recommended charities received in the last year? Do you know how much change the recommendation makes to their budgets, and therefore how significant it is to be placed or dropped out from the list?
Hey Ula, great question! This year we conducted an influenced-giving analysis to assess ACE’s counterfactual impact on funding via our Charity Evaluations and Movement Grants programs. We aim to publish the full reports on November 29th.
During our last fiscal year (April 2023-March 2024) the total reported ACE-influenced donations to the charities recommended during that time was $8.5 million, and we estimate that $3.7 million of this would not have been donated if not for ACE’s influence. The upcoming report will thoroughly explain how this was calculated.
Our charity recommendations last for two years. We don’t guarantee that any charity is re-evaluated or re-recommended, so charities know to prepare for that when their two-year recommendation cycle ends. For some charities, being recommended by ACE might be their first introduction to certain donors. Anecdotally we’ve also found that some donors choose to continue donating to formerly recommended charities.
We expect that being recommended for the first time, leads to a greater increase in funding than retaining a recommendation. The same seems likely for a recommendation for a newer intervention or animal group, or for a younger charity compared to the budget impact of a recommendation for a well-known charity. According to a recent survey, ACE’s annual influence per charity has varied anywhere from about $150,000 to $1,000,000+. Some of those gifts might not be fully counterfactual (this will also be further explained in the report coming out next week). Assessing budget impact and change in recommendation status is something we need to examine further though, so we’ll be expanding our impact assessment work this year to include more than just our quantitative counterfactual impact on funding.
Considering each of our Recommended Charities have significant room for more funding, we suggest donating to our Recommended Charity Fund because these gifts are currently being matched. Donations will help all 11 of our Recommended Charities that we estimate will have an exceptional impact for animals with additional donations.
Do you ever wish there was a benchmark charity with a near infinite funding gap like Give Directly on the global health side to always be able to compare to? Is there anything akin to GD in the animal space?
Thanks Steven, great question! In short: yes we do, and no there isn’t :-) We think GiveWell’s approach of using GiveDirectly as a benchmark makes sense for GiveWell, and we’ve had several team discussions about whether we could take a similar approach. One step in this direction is to seek to get to the same unit of animals helped/suffering averted for each charity to make it easier to compare across charities, and we’ve sought to do that this year through our use of AIM’s Suffering-Adjusted Days (SADs) model. (You can read more about our 2024 cost-effectiveness assessments here.) However, while we found this helpful for this year’s Evaluations, it’s not always possible to reach a meaningful SADs estimate given limitations such as the long-term or speculative nature of some charities’ programs, a lack of reliable data around charities’ achievements, a lack of evidence on the relative cost-effectiveness of different animal advocacy interventions, and the diverse range of programs conducted by the charities we evaluate. We’re also not aware of any charities in the animal advocacy space that share GiveDirectly’s room for additional funding and potential for scaleability.
Instead, we currently base our recommendation decisions on a set of decision guidelines that align with our evaluation criteria (see here for the guidelines and additional context), and use these to score charities against one another. It’s possible that in future a sufficiently scalable charity will emerge, and the animal advocacy movement will have sufficient evidence and data for us to produce reliable cost-effectiveness assessments for all the charities we evaluate, but at the moment this doesn’t seem realistic.
Currently, our Recommended Charities are those we’ve identified as the most impactful giving opportunities for animals based on the information we have available. Considering each of our Recommended Charities have significant room for more funding, for those looking for impactful donation opportunities, we suggest donating to our Recommended Charity Fund that supports all 11 of our Recommended Charities and where gifts are currently being matched.
Great, thank you! One follow-up question to Number 2 and the SADs: How do you calculate cost-effectiveness for orgs who indirectly impact animal suffering? For example, I looked at the Good Food Fund's overview and there was no CE posted, but they have a detailed Theory of Change analysis. Is there a different calculation to recommend charities whose goal is to create systems change that will indirectly reduce suffering, but for which SADs are not as appropriate to calculate?
That’s a great question and one that we spent a lot of time considering in this year’s round of evaluations. We aimed to use SADs in all cost-effectiveness analyses and attempted to find a way to quantify each charity’s impact using the SADs unit. We have found that for more indirect work, such as GFF’s programs, quantifying the number of animals affected is largely speculative and requires a number of assumptions. For these cases, we decided to not make the assumptions needed to estimate the SADs averted but to stop at an intermediate unit in the analysis. For GFF, this was the number of people reached through their programs per dollar. Our reasoning for avoiding highly speculative assumptions is based on one of our guiding principles, which is to follow a rigorous process and use logical reasoning and evidence to make decisions. For cases like GFF, we focused more on their Theory of Change analysis to guide our decision-making. We are excited about their work because China farms around 50% of the world’s farmed animals, and GFF has made inroads with getting animal welfare on the government’s agenda, which could have significant expected value in the long term (although we didn’t model this explicitly).
Overall, we believe that interventions with a long theory of change (such as some policy interventions) and meta-interventions are often too speculative to estimate the number of animals affected and therefore the SADs averted. This appears to be consistent with the existing research in the animal advocacy movement, where the existing cost-effectiveness estimates focus on direct interventions (corporate campaigns, institutional outreach) and avoid quantifying indirect interventions (research, movement building). We will review our methods in the coming months and will reconsider how we compare charities that do more indirect work.
On your recommendation list, there are charities that are clearly cost-effective charities, that you tested with your new methodology, and that stand the test and came across to you as highly impactful opportunities.
On the other hand, there are somewhat more speculative charities, that have a less clear Theory of Change and at the moment could have less impact for animals (which e.g. was not tested with your new methodology, because some of them are recommended a second year in a row).
Are you not concerned that having those double standards this year (some charities evaluated with new, more rigorous methodology, and some not) might lead to directing money to these speculative, and possibly less impactful opportunities, rather than directing them to organizations that create tangible impact for animals?
Thank you for your question. We refine our methods each year and we don’t think that recent changes mean that we can no longer rely on the decisions we made in 2023.
Specifically about cost-effectiveness, in the past ACE has identified limitations of direct cost-effectiveness analyses and found it less helpful to directly estimate the number of animals helped per dollar. Instead, we began exploring ways to model cost-effectiveness, such as achievement scores and the Impact Potential criterion. Since then, the animal advocacy movement (namely Welfare Footprint Project, Ambitious Impact, and Rethink Priorities) has invested in research that enables quantifying animal suffering averted per dollar and in turn, we’ve evolved our methods. However, we think it is still remarkably challenging to do these calculations and draw conclusions from them, and that using proxies is still a reasonable approach.
Additionally, while we’ve introduced a theory of change criterion to formalize our assessment of charities’ assumptions, limitations, and risks, we have already been taking these factors into account during our decision-making in the past. Our other two criteria, room for more funding and organizational health, were included in our methods in both years.
In summary, while we see recent improvements as a step forward, we wouldn’t claim that 2023 charities were evaluated with a less rigorous methodology.
Hi, great (and topical) question! Yes, some ACE staff use generative AI models such as ChatGPT and Claude to help generate ideas or to help draft lower-priority internal documents. However, we don’t use such models for external or high-priority documents given the various limitations of AI models (such as the risk of factual errors, biases, and plagiarism), and we also don’t input information that could be potentially sensitive.
We apply a similar principle to image generation models. Given the risk of AI-generated images being seen as misleading in certain contexts, potentially casting doubt on, e.g.. photographic evidence of farm investigations, we instead use images from public-domain sources, prioritizing ethically aligned sources such as We Animals Media.
Personally, the most useful AI tool in my day-to-day work is Perplexity, which cites its responses and can be really helpful for locating research papers. I also find ChatGPT and Claude helpful for summarizing research, cleaning up documents, and advising on spreadsheet formulas. A newer tool is Google’s NotebookLM, which seems very useful for distilling information from a wide range of sources.
For more information you can check out ACE’s Responsible AI Usage policy. We also have an internal document where staff share AI use cases with one another, so you could consider introducing something similar at your own organization if that sounds helpful!
Thanks for your questions! This year we decided to use Ambitious Impact’s new unit SADs (Suffering Adjusted Days) in our cost-effectiveness analysis. This allowed us to provide the estimate in a unit that could directly compare the suffering across different interventions and animal species. For example, we could compare in the same unit the welfare improvement of cage-free campaigns, crate-free campaigns, and institutional meat replacement campaigns (see Sinergia’s review). We found SADs especially useful for more direct interventions, where the welfare improvement and the number of animals affected can be quantified with some certainty. Note that because SADs are a recent methodology that hasn’t been finalized yet, we expect that some of the estimates we used might change. Although we found SADs very useful in our cost-effectiveness analysis, we plan to discuss in our coming strategic sessions whether we will keep using this methodology in our evaluations, and for which interventions it might be more or less suitable. Depending on our strategic priorities and capacity, we will consider refining and updating the current estimates, as well as producing estimates for more interventions and species.
Do you ever wish there was a benchmark charity with a near infinite funding gap like Give Directly on the global health side to always be able to compare to? Is there anything akin to GD in the animal space?
Thanks for the question! None of our current Recommended Charities work on cultivated protein sources, though we have previously recommended charities working on this (such as Good Food Institute and New Harvest) and awarded Movement Grants to projects in this area (such as Cellular Agriculture Australia). We’d certainly be open to considering charities and Movement Grant applicants working on this in the future.
At ACE we currently prioritize farmed and wild animals, so none of our Recommended Charities work to reduce the use of animals for scientific purposes (i.e. research, testing, and science education).
If you’re interested in organizations and institutions that are focused on this area, here are few great options to explore:
The exact details of our 2025 evaluation process and methods are still to be determined but, barring any major strategic shifts in our Charity Evaluation program, we expect to keep our methods largely the same as 2024’s, with refinements based on what we’ve learned. We’ll still ask charities for information that will allow us to do the theory of change analysis, create cost-effectiveness estimates, assess funding capacity, and examine organizational health. The process will begin with charities applying to be evaluated, as it did in 2024.
You can refer to the cost-effectiveness analysis spreadsheets for this year’s evaluated charities to get a sense of the information we needed to make the calculations. We’ll likely still be asking for charities’ past achievements. If we stick with this year’s approach (which we think is likely at this point), we will aim to determine the suffering adjusted days (SADs) averted by those achievements per dollar spent, which requires knowing the benefits of charities’ programs as well as the expenses spent to achieve those benefits.
We have a Recommended Charity Fund disbursement model where we consider each recommended charity’s funding and what ACE’s marginal funding would be used for. Then, we have an internal discussion about where we should prioritize the funding going, based on considerations of funding capacity, quantitative factors (marginal cost-effectiveness), and qualitative factors (theory of change). This year we expect to refine how we allocate funds and publish a blog post about refinements so we can stay transparent about it. If you’re interested in supporting our Recommended Charities, all donations to our Recommended Charity Fund are currently being matched for a limited time!
By using theory of change analysis more formally, we understand a charity’s work and its assumptions, limitations, and risks. This reduces our uncertainty about the scope of a charity’s work and their overall likelihood of achieving their desired impact. By doing a cost-effectiveness analysis that looks at the benefits to animals of a charity’s work divided by the cost of doing that work, we assess the current cost-effectiveness of a charity’s work (usually for select programs). Then when combined with our room for more funding assessment (which asks charities about their future plans), we assess our level of uncertainty about whether the plans are likely to be as cost-effective as the charity’s current work. Taken together, the three criteria together give us a good sense of marginal cost-effectiveness (i.e., where the next additional dollar would be best spent).
We expect that evaluation applications will open in March and stay open for a month. Once a charity has applied and is successful, they move onto stage two where we ask more detailed questions. We typically give charities around three weeks to gather the information requested to answer those questions.
Great, thank you! One follow-up question to Number 2 and the SADs: How do you calculate cost-effectiveness for orgs who indirectly impact animal suffering? For example, I looked at the Good Food Fund's overview and there was no CE posted, but they have a detailed Theory of Change analysis. Is there a different calculation to recommend charities whose goal is to create systems change that will indirectly reduce suffering, but for which SADs are not as appropriate to calculate?
How many counterfactual donations have the recommended charities received in the last year? Do you know how much change the recommendation makes to their budgets, and therefore how significant it is to be placed or dropped out from the list?
On your recommendation list, there are charities that are clearly cost-effective charities, that you tested with your new methodology, and that stand the test and came across to you as highly impactful opportunities.
On the other hand, there are somewhat more speculative charities, that have a less clear Theory of Change and at the moment could have less impact for animals (which e.g. was not tested with your new methodology, because some of them are recommended a second year in a row).
Are you not concerned that having those double standards this year (some charities evaluated with new, more rigorous methodology, and some not) might lead to directing money to these speculative, and possibly less impactful opportunities, rather than directing them to organizations that create tangible impact for animals?
What can we expect to change in the evaluations or evaluation process for charities from 2023?
What new/different information will charities be asked to provide with the new cost-effectiveness calculation? Will achievements still have a role?
How are the allocations from ACE's charity fund determined?
What does the new decision-making process look like in terms of better accounting for the marginal cost effectiveness of funding?
When will questions and layout for applications be made available for 2025? How much time will charities have to provide information once these are made available?
The exact details of our 2025 evaluation process and methods are still to be determined but, barring any major strategic shifts in our Charity Evaluation program, we expect to keep our methods largely the same as 2024’s, with refinements based on what we’ve learned. We’ll still ask charities for information that will allow us to do the theory of change analysis, create cost-effectiveness estimates, assess funding capacity, and examine organizational health. The process will begin with charities applying to be evaluated, as it did in 2024.
You can refer to the cost-effectiveness analysis spreadsheets for this year’s evaluated charities to get a sense of the information we needed to make the calculations. We’ll likely still be asking for charities’ past achievements. If we stick with this year’s approach (which we think is likely at this point), we will aim to determine the suffering adjusted days (SADs) averted by those achievements per dollar spent, which requires knowing the benefits of charities’ programs as well as the expenses spent to achieve those benefits.
We have a Recommended Charity Fund disbursement model where we consider each recommended charity’s funding and what ACE’s marginal funding would be used for. Then, we have an internal discussion about where we should prioritize the funding going, based on considerations of funding capacity, quantitative factors (marginal cost-effectiveness), and qualitative factors (theory of change). This year we expect to refine how we allocate funds and publish a blog post about refinements so we can stay transparent about it. If you’re interested in supporting our Recommended Charities, all donations to our Recommended Charity Fund are currently being matched for a limited time!
By using theory of change analysis more formally, we understand a charity’s work and its assumptions, limitations, and risks. This reduces our uncertainty about the scope of a charity’s work and their overall likelihood of achieving their desired impact. By doing a cost-effectiveness analysis that looks at the benefits to animals of a charity’s work divided by the cost of doing that work, we assess the current cost-effectiveness of a charity’s work (usually for select programs). Then when combined with our room for more funding assessment (which asks charities about their future plans), we assess our level of uncertainty about whether the plans are likely to be as cost-effective as the charity’s current work. Taken together, the three criteria together give us a good sense of marginal cost-effectiveness (i.e., where the next additional dollar would be best spent).
We expect that evaluation applications will open in March and stay open for a month. Once a charity has applied and is successful, they move onto stage two where we ask more detailed questions. We typically give charities around three weeks to gather the information requested to answer those questions.
Does your evaluation process shift at all each year in regards to any regions or interventions that are prioritized?
Could you give us a brief overview of how ACE's evaluation process has evolved over time? What are some major differences between the evaluation process in your founding year versus 2024?
1. We refine the methods of our evaluation process every year based on internal and external feedback in order to improve on the previous year and be more accurate in our assessments. We also update our position on the likely effectiveness of interventions based on new research and consider the particular situation of each country in our assessments. However, this year we didn’t explicitly score or prioritize certain interventions and countries. Instead, we analyzed the impact of the specific work of each charity using our new evaluation criteria (see below). In general (with some exceptions), we continue to prioritize work on farmed animals and wild animals, interventions that are more institutional in scope, and countries that are more neglected or have higher levels of animal suffering.
2. ACE’s methods to evaluate charities have changed a lot over the years. We used to have more criteria to evaluate charities and we have reduced that number of criteria over the years, focusing on the most important factors for making recommendation decisions. The biggest changes we made this year were introducing a process allowing interested charities to apply for evaluation (rather than ACE inviting charities to be evaluated), and updating our evaluation criteria. Specifically, we:
updated our cost-effectiveness methods (conducting more direct cost-effectiveness analyses, compared to last year’s scoring system that was based on less direct proxies for cost-effectiveness);
introduced a qualitative theory of change analysis that explores the evidence, reasoning, and limitations around charities’ programs in more detail; and
updated our room for more funding criterion to place more focus on the likely impact of charities’ future funding plans.
You can read more about our latest charity evaluation process here.
Does your evaluation process shift at all each year in regards to any regions or interventions that are prioritized?
Could you give us a brief overview of how ACE's evaluation process has evolved over time? What are some major differences between the evaluation process in your founding year versus 2024?
What can we expect to change in the evaluations or evaluation process for charities from 2023?
What new/different information will charities be asked to provide with the new cost-effectiveness calculation? Will achievements still have a role?
How are the allocations from ACE's charity fund determined?
What does the new decision-making process look like in terms of better accounting for the marginal cost effectiveness of funding?
When will questions and layout for applications be made available for 2025? How much time will charities have to provide information once these are made available?
Thank you, Amie and Caryn, for this great summary of the discussion! Stray Dog Institute is so grateful to have had the privilege of bringing this topic to the AVA mainstage with such incredible panelists!
Hi, we are accepting applications on a rolling basis. We hope to have the new candidate starting in September though and thus would keep the application open until August. :)
Hi, we are accepting applications on a rolling basis. We hope to have the new candidate starting in September though and thus would keep the application open until August. :)
If anyone reading this gets involved in shareholder activism, please let me know.
There's another little extra way you can help animals if you own shares in a company, in addition to doing shareholder activism. Learn a little more here: legalimpactforchickens.org/investors, or reach out to me!
Thank you, Amie and Caryn, for this great summary of the discussion! Stray Dog Institute is so grateful to have had the privilege of bringing this topic to the AVA mainstage with such incredible panelists!
1-. Sweet Freeze Bakery announces its 100% commitment for December 2024. Engagement link: https://www.instagram.com/p/C4GcIyVO371/?igsh=NW0zeWFvMWVic3By
Scale: National (Peru)
Schedule: First contact in February 2024, follow-up every 10 days.
Who: ARBA
Failed tactics: There were none from the beginning, communication was very good.
Successful tactics: Direct conversations with the owners, linking them directly with cage-free producers in the area. Phone calls and WhatsApp messages.
Scalability: Sweet Freeze Bakery is a company in the pastry business with excellent acceptance in the districts with the most inhabitants in Lima.
Follow-up: We will keep in touch to request reports and bring producers closer.
2- Red Coffee Shop, announces its cage free commitment to be 100% complete by 2025 Commitment link https://www.instagram.com/s/aGlnaGxpZ2h0OjE4MDIxNjUzMDI3MTU3MjIz?story_media_id=3358582698278345950&igsh=a2Q1dGVmZjdsZzh5
Scale: National (Peru)
Schedule: First contact in December 2023, follow-up every 10 days.
Who: ARBA
Failed tactics: There were none, from the beginning communication was very good.
Successful tactics: Direct conversations with the owners to directly contact cage-free producers in the area. In-person visit, phone calls and WhatsApp messages.
Scalability: Company in the pastry - cafeteria sector with excellent acceptance in a district that still has no commitment.
Follow-up: We will keep in touch to request reports and bring producers closer.
3- Mascookie Pet Snack, a pet cookie brand, announces its commitment to be 100% complete by the end of 2024.
Engagement link https://sites.google.com/view/mascookiegalletas/noticias
Scale: National (Peru)
Schedule: First contact in February February 2024, follow-up every 10 days.
Who: ARBA
Failed tactics: They liked the idea of making the change after a week of conversations.
Successful tactics: Direct conversations with the owners, linking them directly with cage-free producers in the area. The commitment is aligned with your objective and vision as a company.
Scalability: This important brand has massive distribution in veterinaries, pet shops and soon in supermarkets, it is the first pet food brand to make a cage-free commitment in Peru.
Follow-up: We will keep in touch to request reports and bring producers closer.
If anyone reading this gets involved in shareholder activism, please let me know.
There's another little extra way you can help animals if you own shares in a company, in addition to doing shareholder activism. Learn a little more here: legalimpactforchickens.org/investors, or reach out to me!
Exciting news! Stray Dog Institute is releasing a groundbreaking report on plant-based alternative proteins in the US. Join their webinar on February 29th for insights and recommendations. Register now! 🌱📊
Peru is one of the countries with the highest consumption of eggs and chicken in Latin America, with a high percentage of informal industry that is not visible or transparent through the Peruvian state and its ministry of agriculture.
Hi Sam! I want to apologize for taking so long to respond. I'll try to be quicker in the future if there is more to discuss after my response here. I also really appreciate you taking the time to respond in such detail. Here are some poorly organized thoughts:
I appreciate you outlining the specific use cases you have for AI in this space. I certainly like the idea of bots that automatically provide factual information. I'm not sure 100% automation will be possible without a good deal of regrettable or borderline false positives or hallucinations, but it could at least automate surfacing misleading information with high visibility. I think the social media use case makes a ton of sense, but it's less clear to me that this won't be solved by a private company.
Thanks for clarifying the limitations of fine-tuning! I hadn't realized that. I'm still a little unsure about the feasibility of training your own models to be capable AI chatbots, though. How big of a non-speciesist corpus do you expect to be able to assemble, and how does it compare to the size and quality of the training data from foundation models? You might have found a way of amassing a ton of data, in which case, kudos. If not, however, I wonder if it would make more sense to focus on developing techniques to clean speciesist data out of corpuses, which could be used by the bigger AI labs. Overall, I'm still not entirely sold on the theory of change with AI powered chatbots, but I'm also not sure exactly what kind of world we're heading into. My sense is that people mostly change their habits/views out of self-interest or under influence from their close peers. I do think personalized messaging/ads could improve the quality of outreach efforts, but where do you get the prerequisite data on the individuals?
I also like your point that advocacy is most impactful when you can point to specific solutions. My sense is that suggesting techniques for pruning their corpuses of speciesist data is more tractable than showing them presumably less capable models trained on a different dataset. This paper might also be inspirational.
No problem, I likewise apologise for taking so long to get this response back to you as well!
I certainly agree that hallucinations are a huge limitation for using current LLMs in chatbots or automated actions of any kind. Hallucinations are far more likely to occur on questions outside of an LLMs training data, so training an LLM specifically on data relevant to animal advocacy should reduce the frequency of hallucinations.
In addition, the database we build will be used for retrieval augmented generation to ground the responses in fact and provide citations for sources in addition to using it as training data.
These two approaches combined with training techniques designed to reduce hallucinations (such as converting graphs showing relationships between objects to text for training data and using data augmentation to increase diversity in the dataset) will make the LLM we train far more reliable and less likely to hallucinate on animal rights issues.
I should clarify that when I say we are training an LLM, we won't be doing this entirely from scratch. We will begin with a pre-trained state of the art open source model, then continue pre-training, before fine-tuning and finally building it into specific tools for specific use cases. This requires far less data and compute power compared to training an LLM from the ground up.
As for how much data we can collect, we've surveyed more than 100 leaders and employees of animal charities and the willingness to share data is very high, more than 70% are willing to share data for training.
Your point about developing techniques to clean speciesist data out of corpuses is an excellent one and we absolutely are planning to do this as well. After we collect data from animal advocacy organisations, the next step is having volunteers provide human feedback on how different responses affect animals. We will use this data to create speciesism detection and ranking models (as well as a diverse range of models predicting other relevant information, such as how logically impactful, culturally sensitive or generally persuasive a message is), which we will open source to allow anyone to use them to clean any dataset of content that is harmful to animals.
Thank you for sharing that paper about the WMDP benchmark, there are certainly a lot of benchmarks that could be adapted to measuring the impact of content on animals. There's also recently been work on developing benchmarks specifically for detecting speciesism, like the AnimaLLM proof-of-concept evaluation from the paper "The Case for Animal-Friendly AI": https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.01199
I definitely agree that benchmarks and evaluations in general will play a huge role in aligning AI with the interests of animals and this is something we aim to contribute to through our work as well wherever we can.
Revealed: Tyson Foods dumps millions of pounds of toxic pollutants into US rivers and lakes
I just wanted to share this excellent research from the Union of Concerned Scientists and the article by the Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/apr/30/tyson-foods-toxic-pollutants-lakes-rivers
Comments on 2025-03-11
Operations@NewRootsInstitute @ 2025-03-11T14:19 (+1) in response to Join New Roots Institute as our Technology and Data Architect!
FYI that this position has been filled.
Comments on 2025-03-06
JoTunna @ 2025-02-28T03:18 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello ACE team,
Thank you for hosting this forum, I hoping I'm not too late to post questions here.
Do you have a definition for what constitutes as lobbying?
Do you have a maximum amount/percentage we need to stay within?
Some of our advocacy work may be considered lobbying hence wanting to be clear.
Thanks!
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-03-06T17:00 (+1)
Hi there! Thanks for your questions.
Thanks, Eleanor
Comments on 2025-02-28
JoTunna @ 2025-02-28T03:18 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello ACE team,
Thank you for hosting this forum, I hoping I'm not too late to post questions here.
Do you have a definition for what constitutes as lobbying?
Do you have a maximum amount/percentage we need to stay within?
Some of our advocacy work may be considered lobbying hence wanting to be clear.
Thanks!
Comments on 2025-02-23
Dydanimal @ 2025-02-19T20:53 (+1) in response to Animal Welfare League 2024 Review and 2025 Plans
Great job! Our best wishes for this year to be just as efficient, and our admiration. One of the biggest challenges for us has been communicating all the work we do. Sometimes we get so immersed in our tasks that we forget to share updates with our peers. Thanks for sharing—we'll check out The Mission Motor!
Thanks! Marysabel
Animal Welfare League @ 2025-02-23T02:23 (+1)
Thank you for the kind words. Please share your updates with us.
Comments on 2025-02-19
Dydanimal @ 2025-02-19T20:53 (+1) in response to Animal Welfare League 2024 Review and 2025 Plans
Great job! Our best wishes for this year to be just as efficient, and our admiration. One of the biggest challenges for us has been communicating all the work we do. Sometimes we get so immersed in our tasks that we forget to share updates with our peers. Thanks for sharing—we'll check out The Mission Motor!
Thanks! Marysabel
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:04 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi Carol, thank you for the great work you do to help animals! As much as we’d love to help every animal, ACE doesn’t currently prioritize organizations and projects working in direct animal care (rescue and rehabilitation) as we focus on more large-scale advocacy work (for example, see our recent grant recipients). In this instance, we would be open to hearing more about your education work (if this is directed toward a large number of people) or your work in advocating for policy change. We ideally want to see work that is scalable and has the potential to affect a large number of animals. I hope this helps.
Thank you, Holly
CarolWhaley @ 2025-02-19T13:52 (+1)
Thank you, Holly. The information provided is extremely helpful.
Comments on 2025-02-17
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:40 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi Jane, thank you for your question and for the great work that you’re doing! We are open to receiving an Expression of Interest from UnchainedTV. A strong application would need to clearly demonstrate how your streaming TV network leads to meaningful change for animals. For example, how does it go beyond raising awareness? Can you provide evidence that your content leads to tangible outcomes for animals? Is this work scalable? And if so, how?
One thing that would be particularly interesting is if you could propose a plan to, or provide evidence for, your content reaching non-vegans and how this impacts them. If you decide to apply, outlining a clear theory of change and providing examples of how your work will be different from existing work will be helpful.
Thank you, Holly
UnchainedTV @ 2025-02-17T22:04 (+1)
Thanks so much Holly. We are precisely targeting non-vegans who are generally not exposed to the vegan message by distributing to platforms that are not associated with veganism at all, but are primarily serving a global population looking for free-to-watch television. We also appear on PBS stations around the US, on Gusto TV - the "world's best food network" - and on In The Black Network and other platforms that are not vegan oriented. And, scalable is our focus as well which is why we've launched a FAST channel that can be picked up by platforms globally. We will definitely apply! Thanks, Jane
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:53 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello, thank you for your question. Yes, we are open to applications focused on a particular demographic within a wider population such as the Mexican-American community. In your application, we would need to see how you plan to strategically target this population so that you are able to have an impact at scale.
Thank you, Eleanor
VicFlores @ 2025-02-17T18:12 (+1)
Thank you!
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T18:01 (+3) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thank you so much for all the great questions! Also, thanks to David van Beveren and the FAST Forum for hosting this AMA. It looks like we've answered all of your questions so we'll be signing off for now. Feel free to submit more questions if you have them—we'll keep an eye on this thread and try to respond over the next couple of days and then will close it.
If you'd like to support highly promising projects working to reduce animal suffering around the world, make a gift to our Movement Grants today.
As always, if you have any questions about our work, you can also reach out to us on email, Instagram, Facebook, LinkedIn, X, Threads, and Bluesky or via our website. Thanks again!
Darleen Martinez @ 2025-02-17T17:36 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello ACE,
I’m Darleen from Plant Futures, a US- and Mexico-based organization dedicated to advancing animal rights, education, and workforce development. Our mission is to equip students with the skills, resources, and community support necessary to transition into a more just and sustainable food system.
We are looking to scale our work in Mexico across three core areas:
- Education & Curriculum Development
- Professional & Career Development
- Campus Advocacy & Student Chapters
Which of these areas would you be most likely to fund?
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T18:00 (+1)
Hi Darleen, thank you for reaching out and for the work you’re doing with Plant Futures. All of the areas you mention are within the scope of the Movement Grants program. Given your experience working in Mexico, you likely have insights into which area is the most pressing or has the highest potential impact right now, and I recommend that you submit your proposal on that basis. Alternatively, if you think that the programs have synergies that mean they should be implemented at the same time, you could apply for general operating funds for all your work in Mexico.
Thank you, Eleanor
Aula Animal @ 2025-02-17T17:12 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi ACE team!
Thank you very much for this space.
We are a an educational project founded by teachers and we basically do talks in schools and seminars for teacher's training as well as educational materials promoting respect and consideration for animals.
I had some questions regarding some tips in order to write a good Expression of Interest but you already answered them, so thank you very much in advanced : )
Anyway, I have some doubts:
Thank you very much!
Kind regards,
Pilar
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:50 (+1)
Hi Pilar, thank you for your 15 years of dedication for animals!
Thank you, Eleanor
Cinzia @ 2025-02-17T17:19 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thank you for this opportunity.
We would like to know if you are interested in supporting university-led research projects that aim to address issues of protection and welfare by studying the behavior and cognition of invertebrates.
Thanks.
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:45 (+1)
Hi Cinzia, thank you for your question and this work sounds very interesting! We don’t fund academic research unless there is a clear dissemination plan that goes beyond publishing the work in academic journals. We would like to know how you’ll create information value that can be used by animal advocates and lead to impact for animals. Without such a plan, we would be hesitant to award funding. Another factor we take into consideration is that academic research often has other sources of funding (e.g. through government grants or other academic funders) so we prioritize work that is unlikely to be funded by other means. I hope this provides more clarification.
Thank you, Holly
UnchainedTV @ 2025-02-17T16:57 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello, I would like to apply for a grant. UnchainedTV is the brand of our nonprofit media company. We are the world's only free, nonprofit streaming TV network for the plant-based lifestyle, producing, acquiring and distributing award-winning documentaries, vegan cooking shows, biographies and breaking news. Often called the CNN/Netflix of veganism, UnchainedTV is now expanding distribution globally via FAST and VOD channels. Our goal is to do an end-run around the mainstream media blackout on the vegan movement. I founded this nonprofit after 30 years reporting in mainstream media, including at CNN and Disney. Is this something that would appeal to Animal Charity Evaluators and what are your suggestions to focus on in our application? Best, Jane Velez-Mitchell, Founder UnchainedTV (janeunchained news network is the name of the 501c3 EIN 82-3892784)
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:40 (+1)
Hi Jane, thank you for your question and for the great work that you’re doing! We are open to receiving an Expression of Interest from UnchainedTV. A strong application would need to clearly demonstrate how your streaming TV network leads to meaningful change for animals. For example, how does it go beyond raising awareness? Can you provide evidence that your content leads to tangible outcomes for animals? Is this work scalable? And if so, how?
One thing that would be particularly interesting is if you could propose a plan to, or provide evidence for, your content reaching non-vegans and how this impacts them. If you decide to apply, outlining a clear theory of change and providing examples of how your work will be different from existing work will be helpful.
Thank you, Holly
Darleen Martinez @ 2025-02-17T17:36 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello ACE,
I’m Darleen from Plant Futures, a US- and Mexico-based organization dedicated to advancing animal rights, education, and workforce development. Our mission is to equip students with the skills, resources, and community support necessary to transition into a more just and sustainable food system.
We are looking to scale our work in Mexico across three core areas:
- Education & Curriculum Development
- Professional & Career Development
- Campus Advocacy & Student Chapters
Which of these areas would you be most likely to fund?
Thank you for your time and consideration.
morgan @ 2025-02-17T16:40 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello and thank you so much for this space.
We received funding from another grant provider with the condition that we secure an amount of matching grant. Do you offer matching grants?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:25 (+1)
Hi Morgan, ACE does not offer matching grants in the sense that we do not require grantees to secure additional funding as a condition of our grants. However, if an organization has received a grant from another funder that requires matching funds, an ACE grant can be used to fulfill that requirement—unless the other funder has specific restrictions that prevent this.
Thanks, Eleanor
TINDAKAN @ 2025-02-17T16:35 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello and thank you for all you do!
I’m working alongside an incredible team of changemakers and visionaries to launch a groundbreaking multi-day event aligned with the ACE mission. This immersive experience is designed to revolutionize the movement by fusing cutting-edge technology, music, arts, and solution-driven concepts to create powerful, deeply personal engagement.
With a focus on accessibility, innovation, and cultural impact, this event will:
✅ Advance skill-building and training programs
✅ Foster collaborative networks
✅ Empower grassroots leadership
✅ Showcase groundbreaking solutions for planetary, animal, and nature protection
✅ Inspire individuals to step into action
This initiative is deeply committed to strengthening eco-social justice issues, including the animal advocacy movement. Through a dynamic range of platforms, it amplifies awareness, fuels community-driven action, and equips advocates with cutting-edge tools, resources and a variety of support to create lasting change—for animals, people, and the planet.
Is this something ACE would fund to help get off the ground? Please let me know if you have any questions to help further render a determination.
In Action & Solidarity,
~Jeremy
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:23 (+1)
Thank you for your question—it sounds like an exciting initiative. For a proposal like this, we would need to understand how the event would lead to meaningful change for a large number of animals. Specifically, we’d be interested in whether the event is targeting influential individuals within the movement, how it differs from or complements existing initiatives, and what concrete outcomes it aims to achieve.
If you decide to submit an expression of interest, providing specific examples of expected outcomes would strengthen your proposal.
Eleanor
Cinzia @ 2025-02-17T17:19 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thank you for this opportunity.
We would like to know if you are interested in supporting university-led research projects that aim to address issues of protection and welfare by studying the behavior and cognition of invertebrates.
Thanks.
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:26 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi Julius, thank you for your questions!
Thank you, Eleanor
Julius kirumira @ 2025-02-17T17:17 (+1)
Thanks so much for the clarification 😊
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:26 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi Julius, thank you for your questions!
Thank you, Eleanor
Julius kirumira @ 2025-02-17T17:16 (+1)
Thanks so much for the clarification 😊
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:06 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi Silvano, thank you for your question!
We would be open to receiving an Expression of Interest from your organization. Research on the impact of documentaries is mixed—while some films have had outsized effects, reported impact varies significantly by country and context. Because of this, our team is somewhat uncertain about documentaries as an intervention overall, meaning a strong application would need to clearly demonstrate how the films and their distribution would lead to meaningful outcomes for animals.
We’d be particularly interested in how this project would go beyond raising awareness to create concrete impact, whether through policy change, movement-building, or direct improvements for animals. If you decide to apply, outlining a clear theory of change and providing examples of how similar initiatives have led to measurable outcomes would strengthen your application.
Thank you, Eleanor
Silvano Lieger @ 2025-02-17T17:15 (+1)
Amazing, thank you for your thoughtful reply, Eleanor!
Aula Animal @ 2025-02-17T17:12 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi ACE team!
Thank you very much for this space.
We are a an educational project founded by teachers and we basically do talks in schools and seminars for teacher's training as well as educational materials promoting respect and consideration for animals.
I had some questions regarding some tips in order to write a good Expression of Interest but you already answered them, so thank you very much in advanced : )
Anyway, I have some doubts:
Thank you very much!
Kind regards,
Pilar
Silvano Lieger @ 2025-02-17T16:22 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi Eleanor, Elisabeth and Holly, and thanks for doing this.
I’m working with Fauna Films on a short-film fellowship concept that would use our filmmaking expertise to spotlight under-resourced animal advocacy groups in the Global South. Our goal is to help them document their work and their stories in a way that raises awareness, ideally fosters institutional change, and builds capacity, especially in communities that often go unheard. Would a storytelling-focused initiative like this, aimed at amplifying local advocates and campaigns, align with the priorities for ACE’s Movement Grants? Is this something you'd at all consider in the current round?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:06 (+1)
Hi Silvano, thank you for your question!
We would be open to receiving an Expression of Interest from your organization. Research on the impact of documentaries is mixed—while some films have had outsized effects, reported impact varies significantly by country and context. Because of this, our team is somewhat uncertain about documentaries as an intervention overall, meaning a strong application would need to clearly demonstrate how the films and their distribution would lead to meaningful outcomes for animals.
We’d be particularly interested in how this project would go beyond raising awareness to create concrete impact, whether through policy change, movement-building, or direct improvements for animals. If you decide to apply, outlining a clear theory of change and providing examples of how similar initiatives have led to measurable outcomes would strengthen your application.
Thank you, Eleanor
CarolWhaley @ 2025-02-14T15:13 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thank you for this opportunity. I am working with an organization with a mission to rescue and rehabilitate farmed animals from abuse, neglect, and abandonment, provide humane education with a focus on veganism, rehabilitate wildlife, and advocate for policy changes to benefit animals. Very much looking forward to applying for grant funding.
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:04 (+1)
Hi Carol, thank you for the great work you do to help animals! As much as we’d love to help every animal, ACE doesn’t currently prioritize organizations and projects working in direct animal care (rescue and rehabilitation) as we focus on more large-scale advocacy work (for example, see our recent grant recipients). In this instance, we would be open to hearing more about your education work (if this is directed toward a large number of people) or your work in advocating for policy change. We ideally want to see work that is scalable and has the potential to affect a large number of animals. I hope this helps.
Thank you, Holly
Amruza @ 2025-02-17T16:03 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Would you consider funding fund individuals (who have a fiscal sponsor) to do capacity building work for the movement?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:03 (+1)
Hi Amruza, yes, capacity building working is within the scope of the program. You can find the full Movement Grants eligibility criteria here on our website under the FAQs: What are we interested in funding? What are we not interested in funding?
Thanks, Eleanor
David Michelson @ 2025-02-17T04:07 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Appreciate you all hosting this AMA. I do have three questions related to what grants ACE might be open to considering.
1. Is there a time when ACE might consider funding ballot initiative proposals that go further in their ask than the initiatives we saw in 2024?
2. What impact from ballot initiatives would ACE consider worthwhile? And are there specific metrics you would be hoping campaigns use to measure their impact?
3. Are there other ways ACE may be interested in supporting ballot initiative campaigns that they may not choose to fund directly?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T17:01 (+1)
Hi David, thanks for your questions!
Thank you, Holly and Eleanor
UnchainedTV @ 2025-02-17T16:57 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello, I would like to apply for a grant. UnchainedTV is the brand of our nonprofit media company. We are the world's only free, nonprofit streaming TV network for the plant-based lifestyle, producing, acquiring and distributing award-winning documentaries, vegan cooking shows, biographies and breaking news. Often called the CNN/Netflix of veganism, UnchainedTV is now expanding distribution globally via FAST and VOD channels. Our goal is to do an end-run around the mainstream media blackout on the vegan movement. I founded this nonprofit after 30 years reporting in mainstream media, including at CNN and Disney. Is this something that would appeal to Animal Charity Evaluators and what are your suggestions to focus on in our application? Best, Jane Velez-Mitchell, Founder UnchainedTV (janeunchained news network is the name of the 501c3 EIN 82-3892784)
Mpho Hlalele @ 2025-02-17T16:12 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thank you for this session.
What are the metrics of success you use when assessing potential projects?
Do you accept proposals that incorporate regranting to other relevant actors in the movement?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:54 (+1)
Thanks for joining and for your questions.
We assess effectiveness on a case-by-case basis, depending on the intervention and the stage of the project (e.g., pilot, scaling, or full implementation). We start with what the applicant states they aim to achieve and how they plan to measure it. Based on this, we identify additional reporting requirements and share them with the grant recipient early on in the grant period, allowing them to provide feedback if they believe other metrics would be more useful. We are in the early stages of implementing our own Measurement, Evaluation, and Learning (MEL) in the Movement Grants program, which will include what we learn from our grant reporting to understand our own impact. We hope to share how this is going towards the end of the year.
At this time, we are not considering applications for regranting, as we are a regranting organization ourselves. However, if you know of a regranter playing an important role in the movement, we’d be happy to hear about them—we may be able to share their information within our network.
Thank you, Eleanor
VicFlores @ 2025-02-17T16:13 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello and thank you for hosting this informative space. Would you all consider funding to reach a certain demographic in the US? We are a new org that focuses on outreach to the Mexican-American community.
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:53 (+1)
Hello, thank you for your question. Yes, we are open to applications focused on a particular demographic within a wider population such as the Mexican-American community. In your application, we would need to see how you plan to strategically target this population so that you are able to have an impact at scale.
Thank you, Eleanor
James Morgan @ 2025-02-17T14:27 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
What are some trends in the funding space that applicants might not be aware of?
What do you enjoy when it comes to reading and assessing funding applications?
What's one thing you wished applicants would do less or more?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:52 (+1)
One exciting trend is the increase in climate funders supporting a reduction in animal agriculture through dietary change and alt proteins as climate mitigation. Just last week the Bezos Centre for Sustainable Protein opened at Imperial College London with $30M in funding. This shift could open up a lot of funding opportunities for organizations that are currently solely reliant on funding from funders concerned with the welfare of animals.
I enjoy reading applications from new organizations the most –that’s not to say they are more/less likely to get funding– but it is such a pleasure to see the dedication and bravery it takes to start something new. Even more so, when I see they are working in a country where there is a nascent animal advocacy movement.
I would like to see some applicants include a bit more detail on the context in which they are working, in particular, whether there are political, social, or economic factors that might impact their work. Similarly, for some niche species-specific work, it is useful for our grant review team if you include the animal science research you are relying on.
Thanks, Eleanor
abir.gitlin @ 2025-02-17T16:17 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi ACE team!
My name is Abir Gitlin, and I’m a PhD student (Environmental Studies and International Relations) at the Hebrew University in Israel.
My research focuses on how political ideology shapes responses to meat reduction messaging (in the US and Israel), with the goal of designing effective interventions that promote policy support and behavioral change.
My questions are: does ACE fund academic research that aims to promote social change on meat consumption? If so, what kinds of costs are typically covered under Movement Grants, and what criteria do you prioritize when evaluating research proposals?
Thanks in advance!
Abir
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:51 (+1)
Thanks for doing this interesting work, Abir. We don’t fund academic research like this unless there is a clear dissemination plan that goes beyond publishing the work in academic journals. We want to know how you’ll create information value that can be used by animal advocates and lead to impact for animals, so without such a plan in place we would be very hesitant to award funding. An additional factor is that academic research often has other sources of funding (e.g. through government grants or other academic funders) so we prioritize funding work that is unlikely to be funded by other means.
Thanks, Elisabeth
morgan @ 2025-02-17T16:40 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello and thank you so much for this space.
We received funding from another grant provider with the condition that we secure an amount of matching grant. Do you offer matching grants?
Gwenna @ 2025-02-17T15:32 (+3) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello. This is my first time approaching and considering applying for a grant from ACE. I wanted to know if you accept grants for salaries of employees and if you fund projects from US citizens who want to do outreach work in other countries. Thank you.
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:39 (+2)
Hi Gwenna,
Yes, in some cases we’ll fund operating costs like salaries, depending on the type and strength of the application, and the operating budget of the organization that the employee works at. We’ll also fund projects from U.S. citizens who want to do outreach work in other countries; however, we take seriously the importance of our grantees understanding the cultural context of their work, so we’d need to see in the application some kind of evidence of “right fit” for the person doing the work. For general outreach work, we’d also need to see evidence of a strategically developed approach that has the capacity to reach people at scale and track relevant outcomes.
Thank you, Elisabeth
TINDAKAN @ 2025-02-17T16:35 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello and thank you for all you do!
I’m working alongside an incredible team of changemakers and visionaries to launch a groundbreaking multi-day event aligned with the ACE mission. This immersive experience is designed to revolutionize the movement by fusing cutting-edge technology, music, arts, and solution-driven concepts to create powerful, deeply personal engagement.
With a focus on accessibility, innovation, and cultural impact, this event will:
✅ Advance skill-building and training programs
✅ Foster collaborative networks
✅ Empower grassroots leadership
✅ Showcase groundbreaking solutions for planetary, animal, and nature protection
✅ Inspire individuals to step into action
This initiative is deeply committed to strengthening eco-social justice issues, including the animal advocacy movement. Through a dynamic range of platforms, it amplifies awareness, fuels community-driven action, and equips advocates with cutting-edge tools, resources and a variety of support to create lasting change—for animals, people, and the planet.
Is this something ACE would fund to help get off the ground? Please let me know if you have any questions to help further render a determination.
In Action & Solidarity,
~Jeremy
Tracyk @ 2025-02-14T22:45 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thanks for this opportunity! I am asking on behalf of Switch4Good, are you excited to fund federal legislation, corporate policy change (like Starbucks and Tim Horton's recently dropping the upcharge for plant-based milk), governmental policy change (like the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the Women’s, Infants and Children’s Program) and/or effective digital campaigns to help upend the Ultra Processed Food myth? Thank you again for your consideration.
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:27 (+1)
Thank you for your question! Federal legislation, corporate policy change, and governmental policy change all have the potential to have a huge impact based on the change that is being called for and the likelihood of success. For each of the ideas you have suggested, we would like to hear what your expected outcomes are, how you’re tracking them, and how you expect those outcomes to have downstream impacts for animals e.g., did removing the surcharge for plant-based milks in Starbucks result in a significant reduction in dairy milk consumption? We are currently highly uncertain about the impact of digital campaigns, but find they can be impactful as part of a wider campaign utilizing multiple tactics—it will be interesting to learn more about the impact you are hoping to see with your UPF campaign!
Thank you, Elisabeth
Julius kirumira @ 2025-02-15T16:46 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thanks ACE for the opportunity and my questions are;
Thanks so much, looking forward to hearing from you 😊
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:26 (+2)
Hi Julius, thank you for your questions!
Thank you, Eleanor
Silvano Lieger @ 2025-02-17T16:22 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi Eleanor, Elisabeth and Holly, and thanks for doing this.
I’m working with Fauna Films on a short-film fellowship concept that would use our filmmaking expertise to spotlight under-resourced animal advocacy groups in the Global South. Our goal is to help them document their work and their stories in a way that raises awareness, ideally fosters institutional change, and builds capacity, especially in communities that often go unheard. Would a storytelling-focused initiative like this, aimed at amplifying local advocates and campaigns, align with the priorities for ACE’s Movement Grants? Is this something you'd at all consider in the current round?
abir.gitlin @ 2025-02-17T16:17 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi ACE team!
My name is Abir Gitlin, and I’m a PhD student (Environmental Studies and International Relations) at the Hebrew University in Israel.
My research focuses on how political ideology shapes responses to meat reduction messaging (in the US and Israel), with the goal of designing effective interventions that promote policy support and behavioral change.
My questions are: does ACE fund academic research that aims to promote social change on meat consumption? If so, what kinds of costs are typically covered under Movement Grants, and what criteria do you prioritize when evaluating research proposals?
Thanks in advance!
Abir
VicFlores @ 2025-02-17T16:13 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello and thank you for hosting this informative space. Would you all consider funding to reach a certain demographic in the US? We are a new org that focuses on outreach to the Mexican-American community.
Mpho Hlalele @ 2025-02-17T16:12 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thank you for this session.
What are the metrics of success you use when assessing potential projects?
Do you accept proposals that incorporate regranting to other relevant actors in the movement?
Alfred Sihwa @ 2025-02-11T04:55 (+3) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Which are the most impactfull areas for Africa, especially sun saharan Africca
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:10 (+1)
Hi Alfred, thank you for your question!
Sub-Saharan Africa includes many countries and contexts, so I am reluctant to make any sweeping statements about what are the most impactful areas for such a large region, but I will try to offer some useful thoughts.
There has been relatively little advocacy work in the region, so if I were to advise groups on what they might focus on, I would start by looking at what interventions have been the most impactful in other parts of the world, and focus on how one might adapt such approaches to the new context. For instance, higher rates of informal markets, or norms around communication might be different, this would lead to significant changes in how you might implement an intervention that has been successful in other parts of the world.
Another angle would be to look at what interventions have uniquely worked well in your country for other (non-animal) issues, and if you could test whether these interventions could be used to benefit animals.
The current and predicted rate of animal farming and consumption vary greatly between countries within sub-Saharan Africa so it is possible that if you have the freedom to move and work in different countries (I appreciate this is a privilege many don’t have), you may find that you can be more impactful in your work.
I am not an expert in advocacy in this region, so I would love to see in the replies what others think!
Thank you, Eleanor
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:08 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hi @Tracyk, you can just post your questions in the comments section here and we will respond to you :)
Tracyk @ 2025-02-17T16:10 (+1)
Wonderful! Thanks so much.
Tracyk @ 2025-02-17T15:58 (0) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Will this be a live forum? I am not seeing a link here to join if so....thanks!
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2025-02-17T16:08 (+1)
Hi @Tracyk, you can just post your questions in the comments section here and we will respond to you :)
Amruza @ 2025-02-17T16:03 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Would you consider funding fund individuals (who have a fiscal sponsor) to do capacity building work for the movement?
Tracyk @ 2025-02-17T15:58 (0) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Will this be a live forum? I am not seeing a link here to join if so....thanks!
Gwenna @ 2025-02-17T15:32 (+3) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Hello. This is my first time approaching and considering applying for a grant from ACE. I wanted to know if you accept grants for salaries of employees and if you fund projects from US citizens who want to do outreach work in other countries. Thank you.
James Morgan @ 2025-02-17T14:27 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
What are some trends in the funding space that applicants might not be aware of?
What do you enjoy when it comes to reading and assessing funding applications?
What's one thing you wished applicants would do less or more?
David Michelson @ 2025-02-17T04:07 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Appreciate you all hosting this AMA. I do have three questions related to what grants ACE might be open to considering.
1. Is there a time when ACE might consider funding ballot initiative proposals that go further in their ask than the initiatives we saw in 2024?
2. What impact from ballot initiatives would ACE consider worthwhile? And are there specific metrics you would be hoping campaigns use to measure their impact?
3. Are there other ways ACE may be interested in supporting ballot initiative campaigns that they may not choose to fund directly?
Comments on 2025-02-15
Julius kirumira @ 2025-02-15T16:46 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thanks ACE for the opportunity and my questions are;
Thanks so much, looking forward to hearing from you 😊
Comments on 2025-02-14
Tracyk @ 2025-02-14T22:45 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thanks for this opportunity! I am asking on behalf of Switch4Good, are you excited to fund federal legislation, corporate policy change (like Starbucks and Tim Horton's recently dropping the upcharge for plant-based milk), governmental policy change (like the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the Women’s, Infants and Children’s Program) and/or effective digital campaigns to help upend the Ultra Processed Food myth? Thank you again for your consideration.
CarolWhaley @ 2025-02-14T15:13 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thank you for this opportunity. I am working with an organization with a mission to rescue and rehabilitate farmed animals from abuse, neglect, and abandonment, provide humane education with a focus on veganism, rehabilitate wildlife, and advocate for policy changes to benefit animals. Very much looking forward to applying for grant funding.
CarolWhaley @ 2025-02-14T15:07 (+1) in response to Help Us Win Funding for Aquatic Animal Welfare – Vote for ALI in Project for Awesome!
Voted! Best of luck.
CarolWhaley @ 2025-02-14T14:58 (+1) in response to The Humane League is hiring a Policy Advisor!
The Humane League is doing impactful work on behalf of animals. I'll be sending my resume your way. Wishing you the best of luck finding the perfect candidate.
Comments on 2025-02-13
Rubem Gomes @ 2025-02-13T16:26 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thank you very much for the opportunity, I don't have any questions. Gratitude!
Comments on 2025-02-11
Alfred Sihwa @ 2025-02-11T04:55 (+3) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Which are the most impactfull areas for Africa, especially sun saharan Africca
Alfred Sihwa @ 2025-02-11T04:54 (+2) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on February 17 at 8-10am PT
Thank you for this opportunity
Comments on 2025-02-01
ElijahWhipple @ 2025-02-01T20:15 (+1) in response to Animal Partisan: 2024 Year In Review Video
I enjoyed watching the video and looking through the fbi presentation! The "Domestic Terrorism / Weapons of Mass Destruction" slide made me laugh. It looks like a meme...
Comments on 2025-01-27
Max Broad @ 2025-01-27T17:03 (+1) in response to Animal Partisan: 2024 Year In Review Video
Congrats on these victories, Will and AP!
Comments on 2024-12-04
Hamna Azam @ 2024-12-04T13:38 (+1) in response to Grant Opportunity for Diet-change Work
Supporting impactful diet-change projects is such a meaningful initiative! If you’re applying, consider exploring complementary ideas like integrating wellness benefits. For example, pairing plant-based advocacy with health boosters like hydrogen water might resonate with audiences.
Comments on 2024-11-21
Kevin Xia @ 2024-11-19T18:41 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Hey there! Thank you so much for your work! A couple of questions:
- Do you have an explicit method on how you arrive at whether a charity is being recommended based on the "scores"/evaluations they receive on your different criteria? I.e., do they need to clear a certain bar in every criteria, are some criteria (say, Impact) weighted more than others (say Organizational Health), is there a "total sum" that needs to be exceeded, etc.?
- Are there/do you intend to publish more detailed reviews of the charities that were not recommended?
- After having revised the methodology quite a bit, what are some areas in your new methodology that you are uncertain about and why?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-21T20:56 (+1)
Thanks for these questions!
– Elisabeth
Comments on 2024-11-19
Kevin Xia @ 2024-11-19T18:41 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Hey there! Thank you so much for your work! A couple of questions:
- Do you have an explicit method on how you arrive at whether a charity is being recommended based on the "scores"/evaluations they receive on your different criteria? I.e., do they need to clear a certain bar in every criteria, are some criteria (say, Impact) weighted more than others (say Organizational Health), is there a "total sum" that needs to be exceeded, etc.?
- Are there/do you intend to publish more detailed reviews of the charities that were not recommended?
- After having revised the methodology quite a bit, what are some areas in your new methodology that you are uncertain about and why?
Alene @ 2024-09-13T20:24 (+1) in response to Civil Litigation for Farmed Animals - Notes From EAGxBerkeley Talk
Thank you for posting this, Noa!!!!! <3 <3 <3
Alexander Togbah Wornie @ 2024-11-19T18:17 (+1)
Thank you very much for the opportunity and I will participate in the Fast Forums.
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T18:03 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Thank you for the great questions! It looks like we've answered all of them so we'll be signing off for now. Feel free to submit more questions if you have them—we'll keep an eye on this thread and try to respond later in the week. As always, if you have any questions about our work, you can also reach out to us on email via our website.
If you’re looking for impactful giving opportunities for animals this giving season, for a limited time, all donations to our Recommended Charity Fund will be matched! Your support will help all 11 of our Recommended Charities that we estimate will have an exceptional impact for animals with additional donations.
Thank you!
ulazarosa @ 2024-11-19T16:28 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
How many counterfactual donations have the recommended charities received in the last year? Do you know how much change the recommendation makes to their budgets, and therefore how significant it is to be placed or dropped out from the list?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T17:58 (+4)
Hey Ula, great question! This year we conducted an influenced-giving analysis to assess ACE’s counterfactual impact on funding via our Charity Evaluations and Movement Grants programs. We aim to publish the full reports on November 29th.
During our last fiscal year (April 2023-March 2024) the total reported ACE-influenced donations to the charities recommended during that time was $8.5 million, and we estimate that $3.7 million of this would not have been donated if not for ACE’s influence. The upcoming report will thoroughly explain how this was calculated.
Our charity recommendations last for two years. We don’t guarantee that any charity is re-evaluated or re-recommended, so charities know to prepare for that when their two-year recommendation cycle ends. For some charities, being recommended by ACE might be their first introduction to certain donors. Anecdotally we’ve also found that some donors choose to continue donating to formerly recommended charities.
We expect that being recommended for the first time, leads to a greater increase in funding than retaining a recommendation. The same seems likely for a recommendation for a newer intervention or animal group, or for a younger charity compared to the budget impact of a recommendation for a well-known charity. According to a recent survey, ACE’s annual influence per charity has varied anywhere from about $150,000 to $1,000,000+. Some of those gifts might not be fully counterfactual (this will also be further explained in the report coming out next week). Assessing budget impact and change in recommendation status is something we need to examine further though, so we’ll be expanding our impact assessment work this year to include more than just our quantitative counterfactual impact on funding.
Considering each of our Recommended Charities have significant room for more funding, we suggest donating to our Recommended Charity Fund because these gifts are currently being matched. Donations will help all 11 of our Recommended Charities that we estimate will have an exceptional impact for animals with additional donations.
— Elisabeth
stevenhuyn🔸 @ 2024-11-19T16:48 (+3) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Do you ever wish there was a benchmark charity with a near infinite funding gap like Give Directly on the global health side to always be able to compare to? Is there anything akin to GD in the animal space?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T17:45 (+3)
Thanks Steven, great question! In short: yes we do, and no there isn’t :-) We think GiveWell’s approach of using GiveDirectly as a benchmark makes sense for GiveWell, and we’ve had several team discussions about whether we could take a similar approach. One step in this direction is to seek to get to the same unit of animals helped/suffering averted for each charity to make it easier to compare across charities, and we’ve sought to do that this year through our use of AIM’s Suffering-Adjusted Days (SADs) model. (You can read more about our 2024 cost-effectiveness assessments here.) However, while we found this helpful for this year’s Evaluations, it’s not always possible to reach a meaningful SADs estimate given limitations such as the long-term or speculative nature of some charities’ programs, a lack of reliable data around charities’ achievements, a lack of evidence on the relative cost-effectiveness of different animal advocacy interventions, and the diverse range of programs conducted by the charities we evaluate. We’re also not aware of any charities in the animal advocacy space that share GiveDirectly’s room for additional funding and potential for scaleability.
Instead, we currently base our recommendation decisions on a set of decision guidelines that align with our evaluation criteria (see here for the guidelines and additional context), and use these to score charities against one another. It’s possible that in future a sufficiently scalable charity will emerge, and the animal advocacy movement will have sufficient evidence and data for us to produce reliable cost-effectiveness assessments for all the charities we evaluate, but at the moment this doesn’t seem realistic.
Currently, our Recommended Charities are those we’ve identified as the most impactful giving opportunities for animals based on the information we have available. Considering each of our Recommended Charities have significant room for more funding, for those looking for impactful donation opportunities, we suggest donating to our Recommended Charity Fund that supports all 11 of our Recommended Charities and where gifts are currently being matched.
— Max
Sean Rice @ 2024-11-19T16:37 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Great, thank you! One follow-up question to Number 2 and the SADs: How do you calculate cost-effectiveness for orgs who indirectly impact animal suffering? For example, I looked at the Good Food Fund's overview and there was no CE posted, but they have a detailed Theory of Change analysis. Is there a different calculation to recommend charities whose goal is to create systems change that will indirectly reduce suffering, but for which SADs are not as appropriate to calculate?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T17:35 (+2)
That’s a great question and one that we spent a lot of time considering in this year’s round of evaluations. We aimed to use SADs in all cost-effectiveness analyses and attempted to find a way to quantify each charity’s impact using the SADs unit. We have found that for more indirect work, such as GFF’s programs, quantifying the number of animals affected is largely speculative and requires a number of assumptions. For these cases, we decided to not make the assumptions needed to estimate the SADs averted but to stop at an intermediate unit in the analysis. For GFF, this was the number of people reached through their programs per dollar. Our reasoning for avoiding highly speculative assumptions is based on one of our guiding principles, which is to follow a rigorous process and use logical reasoning and evidence to make decisions. For cases like GFF, we focused more on their Theory of Change analysis to guide our decision-making. We are excited about their work because China farms around 50% of the world’s farmed animals, and GFF has made inroads with getting animal welfare on the government’s agenda, which could have significant expected value in the long term (although we didn’t model this explicitly).
Overall, we believe that interventions with a long theory of change (such as some policy interventions) and meta-interventions are often too speculative to estimate the number of animals affected and therefore the SADs averted. This appears to be consistent with the existing research in the animal advocacy movement, where the existing cost-effectiveness estimates focus on direct interventions (corporate campaigns, institutional outreach) and avoid quantifying indirect interventions (research, movement building). We will review our methods in the coming months and will reconsider how we compare charities that do more indirect work.
— Zuzana
ulazarosa @ 2024-11-19T16:18 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
On your recommendation list, there are charities that are clearly cost-effective charities, that you tested with your new methodology, and that stand the test and came across to you as highly impactful opportunities.
On the other hand, there are somewhat more speculative charities, that have a less clear Theory of Change and at the moment could have less impact for animals (which e.g. was not tested with your new methodology, because some of them are recommended a second year in a row).
Are you not concerned that having those double standards this year (some charities evaluated with new, more rigorous methodology, and some not) might lead to directing money to these speculative, and possibly less impactful opportunities, rather than directing them to organizations that create tangible impact for animals?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T17:19 (+3)
Thank you for your question. We refine our methods each year and we don’t think that recent changes mean that we can no longer rely on the decisions we made in 2023.
Specifically about cost-effectiveness, in the past ACE has identified limitations of direct cost-effectiveness analyses and found it less helpful to directly estimate the number of animals helped per dollar. Instead, we began exploring ways to model cost-effectiveness, such as achievement scores and the Impact Potential criterion. Since then, the animal advocacy movement (namely Welfare Footprint Project, Ambitious Impact, and Rethink Priorities) has invested in research that enables quantifying animal suffering averted per dollar and in turn, we’ve evolved our methods. However, we think it is still remarkably challenging to do these calculations and draw conclusions from them, and that using proxies is still a reasonable approach.
Additionally, while we’ve introduced a theory of change criterion to formalize our assessment of charities’ assumptions, limitations, and risks, we have already been taking these factors into account during our decision-making in the past. Our other two criteria, room for more funding and organizational health, were included in our methods in both years.
In summary, while we see recent improvements as a step forward, we wouldn’t claim that 2023 charities were evaluated with a less rigorous methodology.
— Zuzana
Colin Roy-Ehri @ 2024-11-19T16:34 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Do you use any generative AI currently? Do you imagine any potential for it to assist your work?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T17:01 (+3)
Hi, great (and topical) question! Yes, some ACE staff use generative AI models such as ChatGPT and Claude to help generate ideas or to help draft lower-priority internal documents. However, we don’t use such models for external or high-priority documents given the various limitations of AI models (such as the risk of factual errors, biases, and plagiarism), and we also don’t input information that could be potentially sensitive.
We apply a similar principle to image generation models. Given the risk of AI-generated images being seen as misleading in certain contexts, potentially casting doubt on, e.g.. photographic evidence of farm investigations, we instead use images from public-domain sources, prioritizing ethically aligned sources such as We Animals Media.
Personally, the most useful AI tool in my day-to-day work is Perplexity, which cites its responses and can be really helpful for locating research papers. I also find ChatGPT and Claude helpful for summarizing research, cleaning up documents, and advising on spreadsheet formulas. A newer tool is Google’s NotebookLM, which seems very useful for distilling information from a wide range of sources.
For more information you can check out ACE’s Responsible AI Usage policy. We also have an internal document where staff share AI use cases with one another, so you could consider introducing something similar at your own organization if that sounds helpful!
— Max
ulazarosa @ 2024-11-19T16:21 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
What difference have SADs made in your methodology? Will you try to use this methodology across various types of organizations next year?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T16:55 (+5)
Thanks for your questions! This year we decided to use Ambitious Impact’s new unit SADs (Suffering Adjusted Days) in our cost-effectiveness analysis. This allowed us to provide the estimate in a unit that could directly compare the suffering across different interventions and animal species. For example, we could compare in the same unit the welfare improvement of cage-free campaigns, crate-free campaigns, and institutional meat replacement campaigns (see Sinergia’s review). We found SADs especially useful for more direct interventions, where the welfare improvement and the number of animals affected can be quantified with some certainty. Note that because SADs are a recent methodology that hasn’t been finalized yet, we expect that some of the estimates we used might change. Although we found SADs very useful in our cost-effectiveness analysis, we plan to discuss in our coming strategic sessions whether we will keep using this methodology in our evaluations, and for which interventions it might be more or less suitable. Depending on our strategic priorities and capacity, we will consider refining and updating the current estimates, as well as producing estimates for more interventions and species.
— Maria
stevenhuyn🔸 @ 2024-11-19T16:48 (+3) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Do you ever wish there was a benchmark charity with a near infinite funding gap like Give Directly on the global health side to always be able to compare to? Is there anything akin to GD in the animal space?
SungHwang @ 2024-11-19T16:12 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Is there an active effort to promote lab-grown protein sources?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T16:41 (+3)
Thanks for the question! None of our current Recommended Charities work on cultivated protein sources, though we have previously recommended charities working on this (such as Good Food Institute and New Harvest) and awarded Movement Grants to projects in this area (such as Cellular Agriculture Australia). We’d certainly be open to considering charities and Movement Grant applicants working on this in the future.
— Max
SungHwang @ 2024-11-19T16:14 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Which organization is engaged in reducing pharmaceutical or medical animal testing?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T16:40 (+4)
At ACE we currently prioritize farmed and wild animals, so none of our Recommended Charities work to reduce the use of animals for scientific purposes (i.e. research, testing, and science education).
If you’re interested in organizations and institutions that are focused on this area, here are few great options to explore:
There are also government-funded alternatives centres around the world like the European Centre for Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM).
— Elisabeth
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T16:13 (+4) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Hi Sean - thanks for your great questions!
— Elisabeth
Sean Rice @ 2024-11-19T16:37 (+1)
Great, thank you! One follow-up question to Number 2 and the SADs: How do you calculate cost-effectiveness for orgs who indirectly impact animal suffering? For example, I looked at the Good Food Fund's overview and there was no CE posted, but they have a detailed Theory of Change analysis. Is there a different calculation to recommend charities whose goal is to create systems change that will indirectly reduce suffering, but for which SADs are not as appropriate to calculate?
Colin Roy-Ehri @ 2024-11-19T16:34 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Do you use any generative AI currently? Do you imagine any potential for it to assist your work?
ulazarosa @ 2024-11-19T16:28 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
How many counterfactual donations have the recommended charities received in the last year? Do you know how much change the recommendation makes to their budgets, and therefore how significant it is to be placed or dropped out from the list?
ulazarosa @ 2024-11-19T16:21 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
What difference have SADs made in your methodology? Will you try to use this methodology across various types of organizations next year?
ulazarosa @ 2024-11-19T16:18 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
On your recommendation list, there are charities that are clearly cost-effective charities, that you tested with your new methodology, and that stand the test and came across to you as highly impactful opportunities.
On the other hand, there are somewhat more speculative charities, that have a less clear Theory of Change and at the moment could have less impact for animals (which e.g. was not tested with your new methodology, because some of them are recommended a second year in a row).
Are you not concerned that having those double standards this year (some charities evaluated with new, more rigorous methodology, and some not) might lead to directing money to these speculative, and possibly less impactful opportunities, rather than directing them to organizations that create tangible impact for animals?
SungHwang @ 2024-11-19T16:14 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Which organization is engaged in reducing pharmaceutical or medical animal testing?
Sean Rice @ 2024-11-18T17:45 (+4) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T16:13 (+4)
Hi Sean - thanks for your great questions!
— Elisabeth
SungHwang @ 2024-11-19T16:12 (+1) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Is there an active effort to promote lab-grown protein sources?
Kay @ 2024-11-18T20:19 (+3) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Does your evaluation process shift at all each year in regards to any regions or interventions that are prioritized?
Could you give us a brief overview of how ACE's evaluation process has evolved over time? What are some major differences between the evaluation process in your founding year versus 2024?
Animal Charity Evaluators @ 2024-11-19T15:58 (+3)
Thanks for your questions!
1. We refine the methods of our evaluation process every year based on internal and external feedback in order to improve on the previous year and be more accurate in our assessments. We also update our position on the likely effectiveness of interventions based on new research and consider the particular situation of each country in our assessments. However, this year we didn’t explicitly score or prioritize certain interventions and countries. Instead, we analyzed the impact of the specific work of each charity using our new evaluation criteria (see below). In general (with some exceptions), we continue to prioritize work on farmed animals and wild animals, interventions that are more institutional in scope, and countries that are more neglected or have higher levels of animal suffering.
2. ACE’s methods to evaluate charities have changed a lot over the years. We used to have more criteria to evaluate charities and we have reduced that number of criteria over the years, focusing on the most important factors for making recommendation decisions. The biggest changes we made this year were introducing a process allowing interested charities to apply for evaluation (rather than ACE inviting charities to be evaluated), and updating our evaluation criteria. Specifically, we:
You can read more about our latest charity evaluation process here.
— Maria
Comments on 2024-11-18
Kay @ 2024-11-18T20:19 (+3) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Does your evaluation process shift at all each year in regards to any regions or interventions that are prioritized?
Could you give us a brief overview of how ACE's evaluation process has evolved over time? What are some major differences between the evaluation process in your founding year versus 2024?
Sean Rice @ 2024-11-18T17:45 (+4) in response to Announcement: Animal Charity Evaluators is hosting an AMA on November 19 at 8-10am PT
Comments on 2024-09-13
Alene @ 2024-09-13T20:24 (+1) in response to Civil Litigation for Farmed Animals - Notes From EAGxBerkeley Talk
Thank you for posting this, Noa!!!!! <3 <3 <3
Comments on 2024-07-05
LaurenKohler @ 2024-06-04T16:53 (+1) in response to Cutting Through the Controversy on Alt Proteins as Ultra-Processed Foods
Thank you, Amie and Caryn, for this great summary of the discussion! Stray Dog Institute is so grateful to have had the privilege of bringing this topic to the AVA mainstage with such incredible panelists!
Amie Albright @ 2024-07-05T23:19 (+1)
You are so welcome! Thank you very much for being there with us during AVA DC 2024.
Comments on 2024-06-21
Animal Advocacy Careers @ 2024-06-20T07:04 (+1) in response to Animal Advocacy Careers is hiring!
Hi, we are accepting applications on a rolling basis. We hope to have the new candidate starting in September though and thus would keep the application open until August. :)
allisona @ 2024-06-21T03:11 (+1)
Thank you!
allisona @ 2024-06-21T03:10 (+1) in response to undefined
This looks like spam?
Comments on 2024-06-20
allisona @ 2024-06-19T17:51 (+1) in response to Animal Advocacy Careers is hiring!
Is there an application deadline for this position? I quickly scrolled through the webpage and didn't see one listed.
Animal Advocacy Careers @ 2024-06-20T07:04 (+1)
Hi, we are accepting applications on a rolling basis. We hope to have the new candidate starting in September though and thus would keep the application open until August. :)
Comments on 2024-06-19
allisona @ 2024-06-19T17:51 (+1) in response to Animal Advocacy Careers is hiring!
Is there an application deadline for this position? I quickly scrolled through the webpage and didn't see one listed.
Comments on 2024-06-07
Alene @ 2024-05-09T18:14 (+2) in response to Using shareholder activism to help animals
Super cool! Thank you for writing this, Max!
If anyone reading this gets involved in shareholder activism, please let me know.
There's another little extra way you can help animals if you own shares in a company, in addition to doing shareholder activism. Learn a little more here: legalimpactforchickens.org/investors, or reach out to me!
Max Carpendale @ 2024-06-07T10:16 (+1)
Thanks so much, Alene! And thanks for making others aware of this opportunity
Comments on 2024-06-04
LaurenKohler @ 2024-06-04T16:53 (+1) in response to Cutting Through the Controversy on Alt Proteins as Ultra-Processed Foods
Thank you, Amie and Caryn, for this great summary of the discussion! Stray Dog Institute is so grateful to have had the privilege of bringing this topic to the AVA mainstage with such incredible panelists!
Comments on 2024-05-21
Iselda Livoni - Arba Peru @ 2024-05-21T18:58 (+1) in response to Iselda Livoni - Arba Peru's Quick takes
Hello everyone!
!!
We have three new commitments for Peru
1-. Sweet Freeze Bakery announces its 100% commitment for December 2024.
Engagement link: https://www.instagram.com/p/C4GcIyVO371/?igsh=NW0zeWFvMWVic3By
Scale: National (Peru)
Schedule: First contact in February 2024, follow-up every 10 days.
Who: ARBA
Failed tactics: There were none from the beginning, communication was very good.
Successful tactics: Direct conversations with the owners, linking them directly with cage-free producers in the area. Phone calls and WhatsApp messages.
Scalability: Sweet Freeze Bakery is a company in the pastry business with excellent acceptance in the districts with the most inhabitants in Lima.
Follow-up: We will keep in touch to request reports and bring producers closer.
2- Red Coffee Shop, announces its cage free commitment to be 100% complete by 2025
Commitment link
https://www.instagram.com/s/aGlnaGxpZ2h0OjE4MDIxNjUzMDI3MTU3MjIz?story_media_id=3358582698278345950&igsh=a2Q1dGVmZjdsZzh5
Scale: National (Peru)
Schedule: First contact in December 2023, follow-up every 10 days.
Who: ARBA
Failed tactics: There were none, from the beginning communication was very good.
Successful tactics: Direct conversations with the owners to directly contact cage-free producers in the area. In-person visit, phone calls and WhatsApp messages.
Scalability: Company in the pastry - cafeteria sector with excellent acceptance in a district that still has no commitment.
Follow-up: We will keep in touch to request reports and bring producers closer.
3- Mascookie Pet Snack, a pet cookie brand, announces its commitment to be 100% complete by the end of 2024.
Engagement link https://sites.google.com/view/mascookiegalletas/noticias
Scale: National (Peru)
Schedule: First contact in February February 2024, follow-up every 10 days.
Who: ARBA
Failed tactics: They liked the idea of making the change after a week of conversations.
Successful tactics: Direct conversations with the owners, linking them directly with cage-free producers in the area. The commitment is aligned with your objective and vision as a company.
Scalability: This important brand has massive distribution in veterinaries, pet shops and soon in supermarkets, it is the first pet food brand to make a cage-free commitment in Peru.
Follow-up: We will keep in touch to request reports and bring producers closer.
Thank you
Comments on 2024-05-15
Nithin Ravi @ 2024-05-15T14:25 (+2) in response to The moral ambiguity of fishing on wild aquatic animal populations
Interesting, thanks for sharing Michael!
Comments on 2024-05-09
Alene @ 2024-05-09T18:14 (+2) in response to Using shareholder activism to help animals
Super cool! Thank you for writing this, Max!
If anyone reading this gets involved in shareholder activism, please let me know.
There's another little extra way you can help animals if you own shares in a company, in addition to doing shareholder activism. Learn a little more here: legalimpactforchickens.org/investors, or reach out to me!
Comments on 2024-05-07
thedogsmeal @ 2024-05-07T18:10 (+1) in response to You're Invited: Stray Dog Institute's Newest Report on Alt Proteins
Exciting news! Stray Dog Institute is releasing a groundbreaking report on plant-based alternative proteins in the US. Join their webinar on February 29th for insights and recommendations. Register now! 🌱📊
Comments on 2024-05-06
Iselda Livoni - Arba Peru @ 2024-05-06T21:28 (+1) in response to Iselda Livoni - Arba Peru's Quick takes
Hello !
We conducted a new research on the poultry industry in Peru, millions of hens and chickens are used annually to meet the demand for eggs and meat.
ARBA website: https://arba.pe/boletin-arba/como-se-manifiesta-la-crueldad-y-la-falta-de-piedad-en-la-industria-avicola/
YouTube: https://youtu.be/tk_FjJxV0Z0
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/p/C6eW65VOSKm/
Peru is one of the countries with the highest consumption of eggs and chicken in Latin America, with a high percentage of informal industry that is not visible or transparent through the Peruvian state and its ministry of agriculture.
Have a good week,
Iselda
Comments on 2024-05-04
lostinsauces @ 2024-03-28T13:34 (+1) in response to The Potential Impact of AI in Animal Advocacy & The Need For More Funding In This Space
Hi Sam! I want to apologize for taking so long to respond. I'll try to be quicker in the future if there is more to discuss after my response here. I also really appreciate you taking the time to respond in such detail. Here are some poorly organized thoughts:
Sam Tucker @ 2024-05-04T04:45 (+2)
No problem, I likewise apologise for taking so long to get this response back to you as well!
I certainly agree that hallucinations are a huge limitation for using current LLMs in chatbots or automated actions of any kind. Hallucinations are far more likely to occur on questions outside of an LLMs training data, so training an LLM specifically on data relevant to animal advocacy should reduce the frequency of hallucinations.
In addition, the database we build will be used for retrieval augmented generation to ground the responses in fact and provide citations for sources in addition to using it as training data.
These two approaches combined with training techniques designed to reduce hallucinations (such as converting graphs showing relationships between objects to text for training data and using data augmentation to increase diversity in the dataset) will make the LLM we train far more reliable and less likely to hallucinate on animal rights issues.
I should clarify that when I say we are training an LLM, we won't be doing this entirely from scratch. We will begin with a pre-trained state of the art open source model, then continue pre-training, before fine-tuning and finally building it into specific tools for specific use cases. This requires far less data and compute power compared to training an LLM from the ground up.
As for how much data we can collect, we've surveyed more than 100 leaders and employees of animal charities and the willingness to share data is very high, more than 70% are willing to share data for training.
Your point about developing techniques to clean speciesist data out of corpuses is an excellent one and we absolutely are planning to do this as well. After we collect data from animal advocacy organisations, the next step is having volunteers provide human feedback on how different responses affect animals. We will use this data to create speciesism detection and ranking models (as well as a diverse range of models predicting other relevant information, such as how logically impactful, culturally sensitive or generally persuasive a message is), which we will open source to allow anyone to use them to clean any dataset of content that is harmful to animals.
This is quite a complex topic and it's often hard to detail our plan accurately in a succinct way as a result, so I've written a blog post on our website that explains our approach in more detail here: https://www.openpaws.ai/blog/why-animal-advocates-need-our-own-large-language-model
This approach is guided by our comprehensive literature review, which can be found here: https://www.openpaws.ai/blog/literature-review-on-developing-artificial-intelligence-to-advocate-for-animal-rights
Thank you for sharing that paper about the WMDP benchmark, there are certainly a lot of benchmarks that could be adapted to measuring the impact of content on animals. There's also recently been work on developing benchmarks specifically for detecting speciesism, like the AnimaLLM proof-of-concept evaluation from the paper "The Case for Animal-Friendly AI": https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.01199
I definitely agree that benchmarks and evaluations in general will play a huge role in aligning AI with the interests of animals and this is something we aim to contribute to through our work as well wherever we can.
Comments on 2024-04-30
Eleanor McAree @ 2024-04-30T16:40 (+3) in response to Eleanor McAree's Quick takes
Revealed: Tyson Foods dumps millions of pounds of toxic pollutants into US rivers and lakes
I just wanted to share this excellent research from the Union of Concerned Scientists and the article by the Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/apr/30/tyson-foods-toxic-pollutants-lakes-rivers