(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals)
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20130111024318/http://www.myphilanthropedia.org:80/top-nonprofits/national/animal-welfare-rights-protection/2011/peta-people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals

PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals)

Support this Nonprofit
Give Now
Medal-big-2011
87 Thumbsup 36 Thumbsdown   Info-sm
"Up" is the number of experts who agree that the nonprofit has had the most impact in the field. "Down" is the number of experts who disagree that the nonprofit has had the most impact in field.
Peta-people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals
Headquarters Location: Norfolk, VA
Founded: 1980


Mission: People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) is dedicated to establishing and protecting the rights of all animals. PETA operates under the simple principle that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment. PETA focuses its attention on the four areas in which the largest numbers of animals suffer the most intensely for the longest periods of time: on factory farms, in laboratories, in the fur trade, and in the entertainment industry. PETA also work on a variety of other issues, including the cruel killing of beavers, birds and other "pests," and the abuse of backyard dogs. PETA works through public education, cruelty investigations, research, animal rescue, legislation, special events, celebrity involvement, and direct action.

Tags: animal rights, activism, advocacy, animal cruelty, farm animals, laboratory animals, animal exploitation, 2011



Peta-people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals
Story: PETA was founded in 1980 and is dedicated to establishing and defending the rights of all animals. PETA operates under the simple principle that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment. PETA educates policymakers… Read the full story.

Expert Reviews: Evidence of Impact
A very controversial organization, PETA is known for bringing into public view the plight of animals of many different kinds. They have brought many issues to the front of people's consciousness about inhumane treatment of animals even though many experts find their marketing and communication tactics a bit extreme at times.
See the complete expert review.

Leadership
Peta-people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals Ingrid Newkirk. Ingrid Newkirk is an animal rights activist, an author, and the president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). She is best known for the animal rights awareness campaigns she organizes on behalf of PETA, which she cofounded in 1980. As PETA's president, Ingrid has spoken internationally on animal rights issues—from the steps of the Canadian Parliament to… See full bio.


Transparency Information
Gs_seal
This organization has earned the GuideStar Exchange Seal, demonstrating its commitment to transparency (learn more)


Financial Data
Overhead Ratio:
14.93%
Total Revenue:
$35,282,146


From the Nonprofit


Dec 14, 2011
PETA appreciates the acknowledgment of concrete achievements (such as eliminating cruel and duplicative animal tests, or convincing corporations to modify purchasing policies related to factory farm suppliers) as well as a recognition of the public awareness generated by some tactics—like… Read More.



Contact Info
E-Mail:
stevek AT peta.org
Phone:
757-622-7382
Facebook:
Follow_fb
Address:
501 Front St
 
Norfolk, VA 23510, USA
Twitter:
Follow_twitter


Peta-people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals Story: PETA was founded in 1980 and is dedicated to establishing and defending the rights of all animals. PETA operates under the simple principle that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment. PETA educates policymakers and the public about animal abuse and promotes kind treatment of animals. PETA is an international nonprofit charitable organization based in Norfolk, Virginia, with affiliates worldwide. PETA believes that animals have rights and deserve to have their best interests taken into consideration, regardless of whether they are useful to humans. Like you, they are capable of suffering and have an interest in leading their own lives. The very heart of all of PETA's actions is the idea that it is the right of all beings—human and nonhuman alike—to be free from harm. Our world is plagued with many serious problems, all of which deserve our attention. Cruelty to animals is one of them. We believe that all people should try to stop animal abuse whenever and wherever they can. Since 1980, PETA has campaigned to establish a global society in which humans consider the needs of what Henry Beston, noted American writer and naturalist of the mid-20th century, so beautifully called "the other nations." We uphold the rights of individual animals to be respected. For most, that means simply leaving them alone. PETA focuses its attention on the four areas in which the largest numbers of animals suffer the most intensely for the longest periods of time: on factory farms, in laboratories, in the clothing trade, and in the entertainment industry. In today's world of virtually unlimited choices, animal exploitation is simply unacceptable. We can eat better, educate ourselves better, clothe ourselves better, and entertain ourselves better without torturing and killing animals. We have the power to spare animals excruciating pain by making better choices about the food we eat, the things we buy, and the activities we support.

Expert Reviews of PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals)

Evidence of Impact Summary:

A very controversial organization, PETA is known for bringing into public view the plight of animals of many different kinds. They have brought many issues to the front of people's consciousness about inhumane treatment of animals even though many experts find their marketing and communication tactics a bit extreme at times.
See expert comments.

Organization Strengths Summary:

PETA is highly visible, consistent, and well organized. According to experts, they are very tightly focused on their mission and they are able to generate media attention to the cause.
See expert comments.

Areas for Improvement Summary:

A common theme with PETA is that it should tone down its marketing tactics. While creativity and visibility are PETA's key strengths, their weakness is a seeming inability to censure themselves, according to experts. Some campaigns do go too far in the public sphere as some are considered offensive.
See expert comments.

Expert Comments: Evidence of Impact

Select the boxes to display the results according to expert type.

Show:
X
Foundation Professionals (F)
X
Researchers and Faculty (R)
X
Nonprofit Senior Staff (N)
X
Other (consultants, journalists, policy makers) (O)

Communication

R
Exceptionally cost effective at publicizing animal welfare issues combined with effective behind-the-scenes negotiation with targeted industries.

Effective Activism

N
PETA is a leader in policing the circus and animal entertainment industry. PETA has a strong reputation for animal rights activism.

Effective Marketing

N
Their PR and marketing, while controversial, brings a huge amount of attention to the issue.
N
They are effective in getting animal protection issues into the media.
R
They lead highly visible campaigns, particularly anti-fur.

Focus

N
PETA is not afraid to tackle ANY kind of animal abuse issue. They often start working on something well in advance of other organizations, take the "heat" for others for years while educating people about the thing they're exposing. Then eventually, once a critical mass understands about the issue, it becomes "mainstream". I've seen this happen on a number of issues over the years, including fur, vegetarianism, animal research, wool, leather, etc.

Great Outreach

N
They have great success in general in pressuring companies to adopt animal welfare policies or to cease certain activities. Their work with celebrities and outreach to youth has been effective in putting the animal issues in the public eye and conversation.
N
Their vegetarian outreach programs, specifically their Peta2 program, are strong.

Great Reach

N
The organization reaches a tremendous number of people, conducts detailed investigations, and targets its actions specifically to secure needed change.
N
We sponsor a national scholarship contest. Students name PETA more than any other organization concerning which group influenced them to make positive personal changes and also be activists.

Policy

N
PETA regularly convinces companies to replace their animal testing with non-animal alternatives as well as helping animals who are found living in cruel conditions in the pet and other industries. Their high profile campaigns result in many people becoming vegetarian and vegan.
N
They put pressure on food manufacturers or restaurants to buy animal products from companies that treat animals humanely. They advocate more humane treatment of animals and minimal use of animals in scientific research.

Raising Awareness

R
PETA is known for bringing into public view the plight of animals of many different kinds: farm animals, furbearing animals, and animals used in experiments to name a few.
N
They have brought many issues to the front of people's consciousness about inhumane treatment of animals even though sometimes the way it is done is a little overboard. They have moved the bar from what was considered unthinkable 25 years ago (e.g., humane treatment of laboratory animals) to being considered normal and expected.
R
The bottom line is that social change occurs when the general public are made aware of a newly identified issue or problem in such a manner that a broad cross section and a majority are moved to accept that change is needed. The shift in pubic opinion does not have to be completely congruent with the change advocated, but in the same general direction. No organization has done as much to bring animal welfare issue to public awareness as PETA. No other has done as much to build public support for considering animal rights / welfare as a legitimate and important issue.
N
I don't think one can talk about the animal movement without mentioning PETA They put the issue ON the map. Whether agreeing or disagreeing with their tactics, their is no denying that they are probably one of, if not the, most-well known animal group. And if taken outside the animal movement, that they are a well-known "brand" in general. That is an amazing impact for a so-called "fringe" issue.
N
They have popularized the cause of animals rights.
R
Without PETA, the number of people who have even HEARD of animal rights/welfare/protection would be reduced by at least half, in my best guestimate. The same is true for the number of people who connect fur with bloody slaughter and cruel traps. And the number of people who connect an omnivore's diet with factory farms. I also think PETA's motto is also clear and powerful: Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on or use in entertainment.
F
PETA's accomplishments are less tangible, focusing more on awareness and internal promotion than on raising the condition of animals and mentoring the agencies that serve them.

Different Strategy for Creating Change

R
PETA has a unique and more controversial strategy toward creating change. In the past, their methods went too far and alienated those that could most help the cause. Today, although the organization remains "edgy," they stay within certain bounds of decency and help to swing the attitude pendulum toward animals from insignificant to an important social agenda.

Needed

N
They are on the far end of the spectrum. They are needed but wacky.

Leader in Challenging Status Quo

N
I think PETA's impact is not well represented by the numbers. The fact is that PETA paved the way for other national organizations to delve into what used to be controversial issues and are now more mainstream concerns. PETA is a leader in challenging the status quo for animals.


Expert Comments: Organization Strengths

Select the boxes to display the results according to expert type.

Show:
X
Foundation Professionals (F)
X
Researchers and Faculty (R)
X
Nonprofit Senior Staff (N)
X
Other (consultants, journalists, policy makers) (O)

Strong Staff

R
PETA has outstanding staff and leadership as well as excellent viral campaigns.

Strong Reputation

N
The PETA name is known for carrying a great deal of strength and is synonymous with powerful lobbying efforts.

Excellent Marketing

N
Their ads are often brilliant and capture the publics attention. Their attention grabbling campaigns on fur and meat consumption are great.
R
PETA does good marketing to teens: the use of Hollywood celebrities and music stars to promote animal protection to teens. They also have strong support of local initiatives -- e.g., sending me materials for a "meatout day" on my campus at no cost to me.

Visible Activism

R
Regardless if a person agrees with PETA's tactics or not, they are highly visible, take action, are consistent, and well organized.

Effective Communications

N
PETA knows how to get issues in the media with its creative and youth-focused marketing. Getting animal issues covered above the din of thousands of other media messages is a valuable thing. Then other thing they do extremely well is engage youth with their Street Fleet (or Street Team), can't recall the name, but it gets young volunteers to take action for animals, then win points for free gear, etc. This taps into popular culture in such a creative way and meets kids "where they are".

Great Organizational Structure

N
The organization seems to cultivate leadership through the organization instead of hording power at the top. Also has a strong media presence.

Strong Outreach

N
PETA has greatly penetrated the youth subculture.

Broad Reach

N
The group covers a very broad base of issues and conducts detailed research in preparation for its campaigns. It brought animal rights to all -- and has maintained this reach for an extended period of time.

Raising Awareness

N
Strengths are publicity, educating people about the issues, being businesslike, obtaining attention, fundraising, being both edgy and professional. PETA appears to have very good internal communication. A staff member might contact us concerning an issue that happened many years ago, but know exactly who to contact.

Well Managed Organization

N
PETA appears from the outside to be well run at all levels.

Creativity

Strong Leadership

N
PETA has strong leadership. Ingrid Newkirk has ruled with an iron fist and their PR machine is tremendous.
R
PETA has strong leadership in that they have had a mission, a vision of how to achieve that mission and have been both effective and consistent in focusing their efforts over a long period of time. Their creativity and willingness to challenge conventional wisdom in often outrageous and attention getting ways have made the organization very well known, and their messages, even when initially scoffed at, have slowly penetrated the public consciousness and shifted public opinion.
R
Ingrid Newkirk, whatever people might think of some of her tactics, is a dedicated leader, doing what is best for the animals as she understands it. PETA also has an extremely high profile, via their website, their e-mail and snail-mail lists, etc.

Team Player

N
PETA is a huge team player with smaller and grassroots groups. Maybe because they foundation is a bit more grassroots (young and radical probably also appeals more to those smaller, local groups) they share everything; photos, video, flyers, etc. Even activists, sending out info for local groups having events, protests, or sending some of their activists and even staff to other groups events. They are very much a team player. They are also the best in going marketing and messaging to today's youth thru Peta2!
N
The people I have interacted with at PETA have been very approachable and supportive. I asked for help with the legal details of a puppy mill seizure and they were willing to help our organization do what needed to be done. I was connected to someone in their organization that was very experienced with investigations and seizures. They did not expect any glory for their support. They genuinely come across as wanting to do what is best for animals. They even called to follow up after the fact to see if we needed any more assistance.

Sharp Focus

N
They are very tight on their mission focus and they are able to generate media attention to the cause.


Expert Comments: Areas for Improvement

Select the boxes to display the results according to expert type.

Show:
X
Foundation Professionals (F)
X
Researchers and Faculty (R)
X
Nonprofit Senior Staff (N)
X
Other (consultants, journalists, policy makers) (O)

Negative Image

N
PETA still needs to shed its extreme animal rights activism reputation based on a few individuals actions in the past. Media relation should focus the good the agency is currently accomplishing in mainstream animal sheltering practices and sound animal entertainment policies.
N
I think this organization suffers a bit from poor public image so their involvement in issues can sometime be counterproductive. However, the other things that the organization does well -getting issues in the media may inherently conflict with changing some poor public perceptions.
N
PETA is obviously very controversial. Sometimes one might argue even to the detriment of the cause or a specific issue. But one cannot deny that they get conversations started. However there are times when it doesn't make strategic sense to have PETA openly involved in a project. However, PETA seems to understand this and will support something behind the scenes if needed or provide photos and not require credit, etc. so their name doesn't distract from the issue.

Toned-Down Marketing

N
PETA evidently doesn't care about the negative impact that their marketing may make; I think overall their impact is good but they've also brought a lot of negative attention to the animal rights field.
N
Avoid personal attacks on people that are in bad taste (going after Rudy Giuliani, for instance was a bad idea). When people see something that appears to be mean-spirited, even pro-animal people won't like it. Use humor, yes, but always make sure it's not going to be something that makes good people shy away from it.
N
Some of their campaigns can go a bit too far in terms of being offensive to some people, but knowing that the media only takes an interest if something is controversial, I understand their sensational tactics.
R
Some of their strategies are questionable (women naked rather than wearing fur; people wrapped in cellophane to mimic meat in packages). They try to make stronger impact on more conservative people -- i.e., PETA is often linked with the liberal left; not effective with the conservative right.
N
They have a style and it is "over the top" and "extreme" it works for them. If they changed their style they wouldn't be who they are. However, they need to keep tabs on what their staff is doing and how they are representing the organization.
R
While creativity and visibility are PETA's key strengths, their weakness is a seeming inability or unwillingness to censure themselves at all. Some campaigns do go too far for the public sphere. Some are hurtful and offensive to races or groups that PETA has not needed to offend to be effective. They need to set some boundaries.
N
I think PETA has had enormous impact and brought a lot of young people into the movement, but I would suggest they could do much better at civilized dialogue with other leaders in the field and would do well to collaborate on at least some issues. Divisive tactics make our field look idiotic.

They Alienate Potential Allies

N
Sometimes they are too much in your face with their agenda and instead of educating they alienate people. Some of their tactics have eliminated elected policy makers from even talking with them or sponsoring their legislative proposals that could help animals as they are viewed as animal right radicals.
N
PETA is so over the top in its allegations and nasty in its attacks that few people want to be associated with it. Especially damaging to the public welfare is its opposition to any use of animals in scientific research.

More Effective Marketing

R
I believe using sexism to get attention detracts from PETA's mission and further objectifies women. I'd like to see a powerful message developed that DOES make the connection to human suffering (so more people empathize) but that doesn't further oppression of other groups.
N
We sponsor a national scholarship contest. Students name PETA more than any other organization concerning which group turns them off. The students actually go out of their way to say they are not affiliated with PETA. Their sexism and misinformation greatly bothers certain segments of the movement. To others this is very attractive and highly effective.

More Focus

N
They would benefit from abandoning press gimmicks and focusing more on non-confrontational/non-gimmicky vegetarian outreach and farm animal advocacy campaigns.
N
The organization takes extremely weak positions in the area of factory farming and seems to lack knowledge on animal agriculture. In seeking media, the group has done some ridiculous stunts that have done more harm than good--and have turned off people who otherwise could be reached.
N
They don't do a good job on companion animal issues. They are too doctrinaire - they would be more effective if they didn't come across as a religion.

Working with other Organizations

Consistency of Message

R
PETA has a tremendous need for improvement in one particular area: Even though their motto is clearly stated ("animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on or use in entertainment"), their actions are often in conflict with that motto. They negotiate with animal exploiters who have blood on their hands--giving those animal exploiters a place at the negotiating table. They give awards to people like Temple Grandin, who designs slaughterhouses--an odd award from an organization whose motto states that animals are not ours to eat. The same is true for their praise of Whole Foods. PETA often boycotts a business, for example their boycott of KFC Canada, and then when the business makes the tiniest step (changing its method of killing to a less violent one), PETA ends the boycott. So now it's ok to eat chicken? The boycott is over, so everything must be ok at KFC Canada. That is wrong, and it is an abandonment of the millions of chickens who live lives of torture and die deaths of anguish to be sold at KFC Canada. PETA needs to get back to the principles stated in its motto and reject movements like "happy meat" as being valid.

Do More Harm Than Good

N
After PETA employees were arrested in NC for collecting animals to be adopted out and were exposed dumping their bodies in dumpsters nearby, I hoped this would remove this organization from any list of effective organizations. When it came out that their adoption rate is among the worst at any shelter in the US, I hoped that would further reduce their fundraising capability. The number of people who leave their animals and their estates to PETA in their wills has stayed pretty steady in spite of clear evidence that those pets are usually euthanized right away. I am hopeful that public opinion on this organization will deteriorate as their anti-animal agenda becomes ever more clear.
N
PETA has largely been a hindrance to advancing animal protection. They are polarizing and the shock tactics are transparent. They have an impact, but it's a negative one for animals.
N
PETA is great at getting media. However, much of the attention it now garners is not beneficial to the cause of animal protection as a whole. I think PETA would benefit from re-examining its tactics in a world where animal protection is no longer an unknown cause that will benefit from attention of any kind. PETA has done great things but is becoming an obstacle to further development of the movement.
N
PETA is great at getting publicity. For the rest of it, they are dishonest, untrustworthy, self-serving, and slippery. They continually seek media stunts and take credit for improvements in animal welfare that they are only tangentially associated with; they continually mislead the public about the actual truth and nature of biomedical research with animals; they encourage misdeeds in others but stand back applauding while arguing that they have never broken the law. The could improve by being honest.
N
They do more harm than good for animal welfare.
N
This organization often provides caustic misinformation that creates an emotional, uninformed public perception. In doing this, PETA often isolates themselves from those who would be able to better serve their cause. PETA has lobbied for many important changes in the treatment of animals, particularly in laboratory settings, however, this hard work is masked by the misinformation that it provides and the rash and ill informed measures it takes to spread the word about their cause. I would HIGHLY recommend that this organization not be commended on their work, solely due to the fact that ill behavior evidenced by some (albeit, possibly small portion) of their members. Commending this organization will only promote the methods by which this organization operates.

Not Effective in Certain Types of Animals

N
PETA appears to have had a positive impact on stopping the fur trade. However, PETA is a terrible organization in terms of dealing with animal welfare of companion animals. They don't have a positive track record in saving animals, and they make the work of shelters unnecessarily difficult. For example, PETA has stood in the way of No Kill efforts by attacking successful shelters (ie: Tompkins County SPCA via letters to the editor) and disrupts events of shelters if there is meat served.
O
In the farm animal arena, PETA has been taking extremely weak positions that run counter to its position as an animal rights organization. The organization supports weak farm animal standards and seems to lack expertise in this area. It does great work in the laboratory animal arena, but sadly this is not mirrored for farm animals.
O
PETA is fabulous in their advocacy against animal experimentation and vegetarianism, however when it comes to companion animals their policies are a vast disappointment and out of step with the well being of homeless dogs and cats. They are a huge mixed bag in this way.

Does Not Protect Animal Life

N
PETA's organizational strength is its popularity with celebrities and the public's misconception regarding what it does and what the organization believes. Most people believe that PETA cares about the welfare of animals, but they do not and their lobbying and policy stances demonstrates that they believe in animal rights, not animal welfare, and that the right to live is not an animal right in their view. PETA lobbies local governments to round up and kill outdoor cats, and lobbies governments to round up and kill all pit-bull type dogs. The organization believes that all domesticated animals (cats, dogs, cows, pigs, etc.) are all better off dead than living, and lobbies for that position. PETA lobbies against efforts to meaningfully reform animal shelters to save more lives because they do not want domesticated animals to live; they believe domesticated animals are better off dead than in loving family homes. PETA runs one animal shelter in Virginia Beach, Virginia, that year after year, maintains an over 90% kill rate (some years as much as 97%). This is despite the fact that the average American animal shelter kills 50% and the best American open-admission animal shelters kill less than 10%. PETA employees were also arrested and convicted for rounding up dogs and cats from persons (such as veterinarians) looking for homes for homeless animals, immediately killing them in a vehicle outside, and then dumping the animals' bodies in grocery store dumpsters. When questioned about this, the founder of PETA said that the only thing the employees did wrong was illegally dump the bodies, and that killing the kittens and puppies did the animals a favor.


Leadership

Peta-people-for-the-ethical-treatment-of-animals
Ingrid Newkirk
President
Ingrid Newkirk is an animal rights activist, an author, and the president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). She is best known for the animal rights awareness campaigns she organizes on behalf of PETA, which she cofounded in 1980. As PETA's president, Ingrid has spoken internationally on animal rights issues—from the steps of the Canadian Parliament to the streets of New Delhi, India, and from the drowning tanks of Taiwan to the halls of the U.S. Congress. Ingrid was born in Surrey, England, and lived in Europe until she was 7 years old, when she and her parents moved to New Delhi, where her father worked as a navigational engineer and her mother volunteered for Mother Teresa and various charities. Ingrid's early volunteer experiences—packing pills and rolling bandages for people who were suffering from leprosy, stuffing toys for orphans, and feeding stray animals—informed her view that anyone in need, including animals, is worthy of concern. Until she was 21, Ingrid had given no thought to animal rights or even vegetarianism. In 1970, however, when she and her husband were living in Maryland and she was studying to become a stockbroker, a neighbor abandoned some kittens and Ingrid decided to take them to an animal shelter. This was a life changing-experience for Ingrid and led to her first job working in behalf of animals—cleaning kennels and investigating cruelty cases. Peter Singer's book Animal Liberation and Ingrid's experiences in that job and later on—including finding a fox and a squirrel caught in steel traps, finding a pig left to starve on a farm, and inspecting laboratories and circus acts for the government—made her realize that there needed to be an organization like PETA. Ingrid has also served as a deputy sheriff, a Maryland state law enforcement officer with the highest success rate in convicting animal abusers, the director of cruelty investigations for the second-oldest humane society in the U.S., and the chief of animal disease control for the Commission on Public Health in Washington, D.C. Under Ingrid's leadership, legislation was passed to create the first-ever spay-and-neuter clinic in Washington, D.C. She coordinated the first arrest in U.S. history of a laboratory animal experimenter on cruelty charges and helped achieve the first anti-cruelty law in Taiwan. She spearheaded the closure of a Department of Defense underground "wound laboratory," and she has initiated many other campaigns against animal abuse, including ending General Motors' car-crash tests on animals.

From the Nonprofit



Dec 14, 2011
PETA appreciates the acknowledgment of concrete achievements (such as eliminating cruel and duplicative animal tests, or convincing corporations to modify purchasing policies related to factory farm suppliers) as well as a recognition of the public awareness generated by some tactics—like naked marches and colorful ad campaigns—that some people find rude or outrageous, but PETA considers necessary to shake people up and even shock them in order to initiate discussion, debate, questioning of the status quo, and of course, action. We hope that the progress made by PETA in 2011 will maintain the high rating from Philanthropedia’s reviewers.

While PETA recognizes that some believe animals are better off enduring a painful death on the streets than humane euthanasia in a shelter, most citizens agree that shelters should be open to all animals in need and they support spay-neuter and promotion of shelter adoptions as the key to the tragic homeless companion animal problem. Many activists have used the information at http://www.peta.org/issues/companion-animals/rate-your-local-shelter.aspx to improve their local shelter, and PETA’s public service announcements on the issue of homeless cats and dogs are placed for free in major media outlets and reach millions each year. PETA’s goal is a society where every cat or dog has a responsible lifetime home waiting for them before they are born, as noted on our website.


Philanthropedia is a division of GuideStar, a registered 501(c)3 nonprofit organization.
Through independent research, Philanthropedia has leveraged the wisdom of 3012 experts to provide reviews on 560 top nonprofits across 36 causes.