TY 2022 Form 990

(A)
Name and title

(B)
Average hours per week (list any hours for related organizations below dotted line)

(D)
Reportable compensation from the organization (W-2/1099-MISC/1099-NEC)

(E)
Reportable compensation from related organizations (W-2/1099-MISC/1099-NEC)

(F)
Estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations

(1) GERARD BOSS......................................................................
DIRECTOR

3.00
.................

(2) CYNTHIA GRIFFIN......................................................................
DIRECTOR

3.00
.................

(3) SHERRY KELLETT......................................................................
DIRECTOR

20.00
.................

(4) MARIAN PROBST......................................................................
DIRECTOR

2.00
.................

(5) MURIEL VAN HOUSEN......................................................................
DIRECTOR

5.00
.................

(6) RENE TATRO......................................................................
DIRECTOR

3.00
.................

(7) WAYNE PACELLE......................................................................
PRESIDENT

30.00
.................

70,000

(A)
Name and title

(B)
Average hours per week (list any hours for related organizations below dotted line)

(D)
Reportable compensation from the organization (W-2/1099-MISC/1099-NEC)

(E)
Reportable compensation from related organizations (W-2/1099-MISC/1099-NEC)

(F)
Estimated amount of other compensation from the organization and related organizations

(A)
Name and business address

(B)
Description of services

NEW BLUE INTERACTIVE

5138 NEWPORT AVE
BETHESDA,MD20816

LIST BUILDING

115,418

Total number of independent contractors (including but not limited to those listed above) who received more than $100,000 of compensation from the organization MediumBullet

- TIN:

SCHEDULE A
(Form 990)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Public Charity Status and Public Support

Complete if the organization is a section 501(c)(3) organization or a section 4947(a)(1) nonexempt charitable trust.
right arrow

Attach to Form 990 or Form 990-EZ.
right arrow

Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for instructions and the latest information.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2022

Open to Public
Inspection

Name of the organization

CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY INC

Employer identification number

83-2620507

Part I

Reason for Public Charity Status (All organizations must complete this part.) See instructions.

The organization is not a private foundation because it is: (For lines 1 through 12, check only one box.)

A church, convention of churches, or association of churches described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(i).

A school described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii). (Attach Schedule E (Form 990).)

A hospital or a cooperative hospital service organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii).

A medical research organization operated in conjunction with a hospital described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii). Enter the hospital's name, city, and state:

An organization operated for the benefit of a college or university owned or operated by a governmental unit described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(iv). (Complete Part II.)

A federal, state, or local government or governmental unit described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(v).

An organization that normally receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or from the general public described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). (Complete Part II.)

A community trust described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi). (Complete Part II.)

An agricultural research organization described in 170(b)(1)(A)(ix) operated in conjunction with a land-grant college or university or a non-land grant college of agriculture. See instructions. Enter the name, city, and state of the college or university:

An organization that normally receives: (1) more than 33 1/3% of its support from contributions, membership fees, and gross receipts from activities related to its exempt functions—subject to certain exceptions, and (2) no more than 33 1/3% of its support from gross investment income and unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 tax) from businesses acquired by the organization after June 30, 1975. See section 509(a)(2). (Complete Part III.)

An organization organized and operated exclusively to test for public safety. See section 509(a)(4).

An organization organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of, to perform the functions of, or to carry out the purposes of one or more publicly supported organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or section 509(a)(2). See section 509(a)(3). Check the box on lines 12a through 12d that describes the type of supporting organization and complete lines 12e, 12f, and 12g.

Type I. A supporting organization operated, supervised, or controlled by its supported organization(s), typically by giving the supported organization(s) the power to regularly appoint or elect a majority of the directors or trustees of the supporting organization. You must complete Part IV, Sections A and B.

Type II. A supporting organization supervised or controlled in connection with its supported organization(s), by having control or management of the supporting organization vested in the same persons that control or manage the supported organization(s). You must complete Part IV, Sections A and C.

Type III functionally integrated. A supporting organization operated in connection with, and functionally integrated with, its supported organization(s) (see instructions). You must complete Part IV, Sections A, D, and E.

Type III non-functionally integrated. A supporting organization operated in connection with its supported organization(s) that is not functionally integrated. The organization generally must satisfy a distribution requirement and an attentiveness requirement (see instructions). You must complete Part IV, Sections A and D, and Part V.

Check this box if the organization received a written determination from the IRS that it is a Type I, Type II, Type III functionally integrated, or Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organization.

Enter the number of supported organizations ...............................

Provide the following information about the supported organization(s).

(i) Name of supported organization	(ii) EIN	(iv) Is the organization listed in your governing document?		(v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions)	(vi) Amount of other support (see instructions)
(i) Name of supported organization	(ii) EIN	Yes	No	(v) Amount of monetary support (see instructions)	(vi) Amount of other support (see instructions)


Total

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for
Form 990 or 990-EZ.

Cat. No. 11285F

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 2

Part II

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Sections 170(b)(1)(A)(iv) and 170(b)(1)(A)(vi)
(Complete only if you checked the box on line 5, 7, or 8 of Part I or if the organization failed to qualify under Part III. If the organization failed to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part III.)

Section A. Public Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2018	(b) 2019	(c) 2020	(d) 2021	(e) 2022	(f) Total
1	Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grant.") ..	277,005	667,936	1,331,821	3,084,712	2,308,789	7,670,263
2	Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf....
3	The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge..
4	Total. Add lines 1 through 3	277,005	667,936	1,331,821	3,084,712	2,308,789	7,670,263
5	The portion of total contributions by each person (other than a governmental unit or publicly supported organization) included on line 1 that exceeds 2% of the amount shown on line 11, column (f) ..						3,543,433
6	Public support. Subtract line 5 from line 4.						4,126,830

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2018	(b) 2019	(c) 2020	(d) 2021	(e) 2022	(f) Total
7	Amounts from line 4..	277,005	667,936	1,331,821	3,084,712	2,308,789	7,670,263
8	Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources...	39	-13	302	8,766	52,854	61,948
9	Net income from unrelated business activities, whether or not the business is regularly carried on..
10	Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.)..
11	Total support. Add lines 7 through 10						7,732,211

Gross receipts from related activities, etc. (see instructions) ..................

405,584

First 5 years. If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a section 501(c)(3) organization, check this box and stop here ........................................ right arrow

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

Public support percentage for 2022 (line 6, column (f) divided by line 11, column (f)) .........

53.370 %

Public support percentage for 2020 Schedule A, Part II, line 14 ...............

49.900 %

16a

33 1/3% support test—2022. If the organization did not check the box on line 13, and line 14 is 33 1/3% or more, check this box
and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ....................... right arrow

33 1/3% support test—2021. If the organization did not check a box on line 13 or 16a, and line 15 is 33 1/3% or more, check this
box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ..................... right arrow

17a

10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2022. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, or 16b, and line 14 is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test, check this box and stop here. Explain in Part VI how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ............ right arrow

10%-facts-and-circumstances test—2021. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, or 17a, and line 15 is 10% or more, and if the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test, check this box and stop here. Explain in Part VI how the organization meets the "facts-and-circumstances" test. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ............ right arrow

Private foundation. If the organization did not check a box on line 13, 16a, 16b, 17a, or 17b, check this box and see
instructions ..................................................... right arrow

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 3

Part III

Support Schedule for Organizations Described in Section 509(a)(2)
(Complete only if you checked the box on line 10 of Part I or if the organization failed to qualify under Part II. If the organization fails to qualify under the tests listed below, please complete Part II.)

Section A. Public Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2018	(b) 2019	(c) 2020	(d) 2021	(e) 2022	(f) Total
1	Gifts, grants, contributions, and membership fees received. (Do not include any "unusual grants.") .
2	Gross receipts from admissions, merchandise sold or services performed, or facilities furnished in any activity that is related to the organization's tax-exempt purpose
3	Gross receipts from activities that are not an unrelated trade or business under section 513 .....
4	Tax revenues levied for the organization's benefit and either paid to or expended on its behalf...
5	The value of services or facilities furnished by a governmental unit to the organization without charge
6	Total. Add lines 1 through 5
7a	Amounts included on lines 1, 2, and 3 received from disqualified persons
b	Amounts included on lines 2 and 3 received from other than disqualified persons that exceed the greater of $5,000 or 1% of the amount on line 13 for the year.
c	Add lines 7a and 7b..
8	Public support. (Subtract line 7c from line 6.)

Section B. Total Support

Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)		(a) 2018	(b) 2019	(c) 2020	(d) 2021	(e) 2022	(f) Total
9	Amounts from line 6...
10a	Gross income from interest, dividends, payments received on securities loans, rents, royalties and income from similar sources..
b	Unrelated business taxable income (less section 511 taxes) from businesses acquired after June 30, 1975.
c	Add lines 10a and 10b.
11	Net income from unrelated business activities not included on line 10b, whether or not the business is regularly carried on.
12	Other income. Do not include gain or loss from the sale of capital assets (Explain in Part VI.) ..
13	Total support. (Add lines 9, 10c, 11, and 12.)..

First 5 years. If the Form 990 is for the organization's first, second, third, fourth, or fifth tax year as a section 501(c)(3) organization, check this box and stop here................................................. right arrow

Section C. Computation of Public Support Percentage

Public support percentage for 2022 (line 8, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f)) .........

Public support percentage from 2021 Schedule A, Part III, line 15 ...............

Section D. Computation of Investment Income Percentage

Investment income percentage for 2022 (line 10c, column (f) divided by line 13, column (f)) ......

Investment income percentage from 2021 Schedule A, Part III, line 17 .............

19a

33 1/3% support tests-2022. If the organization did not check the box on line 14, and line 15 is more than 33 1/3%, and line 17 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ....... right arrow

33 1/3% support tests—2021. If the organization did not check a box on line 14 or line 19a, and line 16 is more than 33 1/3% and line 18 is not more than 33 1/3%, check this box and stop here. The organization qualifies as a publicly supported organization ..... right arrow

Private foundation. If the organization did not check a box on line 14, 19a, or 19b, check this box and see instructions .... right arrow

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 4

Part IV

Supporting Organizations

(Complete only if you checked a box on line 12 of Part I. If you checked box 12a, of Part I, complete Sections A and B. If you checked box 12b, of Part I, complete Sections A and C. If you checked box 12c, of Part I, complete Sections A, D, and E. If you checked box12d, of Part I, complete Sections A and D, and complete Part V.)

Section A. All Supporting Organizations

Yes

Are all of the organization’s supported organizations listed by name in the organization’s governing documents?
If "No," describe in Part VI how the supported organizations are designated. If designated by class or purpose,
describe the designation. If historic and continuing relationship, explain.

Did the organization have any supported organization that does not have an IRS determination of status under section 509(a)(1) or (2)? If "Yes," explain in Part VI how the organization determined that the supported organization was described in section 509(a)(1) or (2).

Did the organization have a supported organization described in section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6)? If "Yes," answer lines 3b and 3c below.

Did the organization confirm that each supported organization qualified under section 501(c)(4), (5), or (6) and satisfied the public support tests under section 509(a)(2)? If "Yes," describe in Part VI when and how the organization made the determination.

Did the organization ensure that all support to such organizations was used exclusively for section 170(c)(2)(B) purposes? If "Yes," explain in Part VI what controls the organization put in place to ensure such use.

Was any supported organization not organized in the United States ("foreign supported organization")? If “Yes” and if you checked box 12a or 12b in Part I, answer lines 4b and 4c below.

Did the organization have ultimate control and discretion in deciding whether to make grants to the foreign supported organization? If “Yes,” describe in Part VI how the organization had such control and discretion despite being controlled or supervised by or in connection with its supported organizations.

Did the organization support any foreign supported organization that does not have an IRS determination under sections 501(c)(3) and 509(a)(1) or (2)? If “Yes,” explain in Part VI what controls the organization used to ensure that all support to the foreign supported organization was used exclusively for section 170(c)(2)(B) purposes.

Did the organization add, substitute, or remove any supported organizations during the tax year? If “Yes,” answer lines 5b and 5c below (if applicable). Also, provide detail in Part VI, including (i) the names and EIN numbers of the supported organizations added, substituted, or removed; (ii) the reasons for each such action; (iii) the authority under the organization's organizing document authorizing such action; and (iv) how the action was accomplished (such as by amendment to the organizing document).

Type I or Type II only. Was any added or substituted supported organization part of a class already designated in the organization's organizing document?

Substitutions only. Was the substitution the result of an event beyond the organization's control?

Did the organization provide support (whether in the form of grants or the provision of services or facilities) to anyone other than (i) its supported organizations, (ii) individuals that are part of the charitable class benefited by one or more of its supported organizations, or (iii) other supporting organizations that also support or benefit one or more of the filing organization’s supported organizations? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did the organization provide a grant, loan, compensation, or other similar payment to a substantial contributor (defined in section 4958(c)(3)(C)), a family member of a substantial contributor, or a 35% controlled entity with regard to a substantial contributor? If “Yes,” complete Part I of Schedule L (Form 990) .

Did the organization make a loan to a disqualified person (as defined in section 4958) not described on line 7? If “Yes,” complete Part I of Schedule L (Form 990).

Was the organization controlled directly or indirectly at any time during the tax year by one or more disqualified persons, as defined in section 4946 (other than foundation managers and organizations described in section 509(a)(1) or (2))? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did one or more disqualified persons (as defined on line 9a) hold a controlling interest in any entity in which the supporting organization had an interest? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

Did a disqualified person (as defined on line 9a) have an ownership interest in, or derive any personal benefit from, assets in which the supporting organization also had an interest? If “Yes,” provide detail in Part VI.

10a

Was the organization subject to the excess business holdings rules of section 4943 because of section 4943(f) (regarding certain Type II supporting organizations, and all Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organizations)? If “Yes,” answer line 10b below.

10a

Did the organization have any excess business holdings in the tax year? (Use Schedule C, Form 4720, to determine whether the organization had excess business holdings).

10b

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 5

Part IV

Supporting Organizations (continued)

Yes

Has the organization accepted a gift or contribution from any of the following persons?

A person who directly or indirectly controls, either alone or together with persons described on lines 11b and 11c below, the governing body of a supported organization?

11a

A family member of a person described on 11a above?

11b

A 35% controlled entity of a person described on line 11a or 11b above? If “Yes” to 11a, 11b, or 11c, provide detail in Part VI.

11c

Section B. Type I Supporting Organizations

Yes

Did the officers, directors, trustees, or membership of one or more supported organizations have the power to regularly appoint or elect at least a majority of the organization’s directors or trustees at all times during the tax year? If “No,” describe in Part VI how the supported organization(s) effectively operated, supervised, or controlled the organization’s activities. If the organization had more than one supported organization, describe how the powers to appoint and/or remove directors or trustees were allocated among the supported organizations and what conditions or restrictions, if any, applied to such powers during the tax year.

Did the organization operate for the benefit of any supported organization other than the supported organization(s) that operated, supervised, or controlled the supporting organization? If “Yes,” explain in Part VI how providing such benefit carried out the purposes of the supported organization(s) that operated, supervised or controlled the supporting organization.

Section C. Type II Supporting Organizations

Yes

Were a majority of the organization’s directors or trustees during the tax year also a majority of the directors or trustees of each of the organization’s supported organization(s)? If “No,” describe in Part VI how control or management of the supporting organization was vested in the same persons that controlled or managed the supported organization(s).

Section D. All Type III Supporting Organizations

Yes

Did the organization provide to each of its supported organizations, by the last day of the fifth month of the organization’s tax year, (i) a written notice describing the type and amount of support provided during the prior tax year, (ii) a copy of the Form 990 that was most recently filed as of the date of notification, and (iii) copies of the organization’s governing documents in effect on the date of notification, to the extent not previously provided?

Were any of the organization’s officers, directors, or trustees either (i) appointed or elected by the supported organization(s) or (ii) serving on the governing body of a supported organization? If "No," explain in Part VI how the organization maintained a close and continuous working relationship with the supported organization(s).

By reason of the relationship described in line 2 above, did the organization’s supported organizations have a significant voice in the organization’s investment policies and in directing the use of the organization’s income or assets at all times during the tax year? If "Yes," describe in Part VI the role the organization’s supported organizations played in this regard.

Section E. Type III Functionally-Integrated Supporting Organizations

Check the box next to the method that the organization used to satisfy the Integral Part Test during the year (see instructions):

The organization satisfied the Activities Test. Complete line 2 below.

The organization is the parent of each of its supported organizations. Complete line 3 below.

The organization supported a governmental entity. Describe in Part VI how you supported a government entity (see instructions)

Activities Test. Answer lines 2a and 2b below.

Yes

Did substantially all of the organization’s activities during the tax year directly further the exempt purposes of the supported organization(s) to which the organization was responsive? If "Yes," then in Part VI identify those supported organizations and explain how these activities directly furthered their exempt purposes, how the organization was responsive to those supported organizations, and how the organization determined that these activities constituted substantially all of its activities.

Did the activities described on line 2a, above constitute activities that, but for the organization’s involvement, one or more of the organization’s supported organization(s) would have been engaged in? If "Yes," explain in Part VI the reasons for the organization’s position that its supported organization(s) would have engaged in these activities but for the organization’s involvement.

Parent of Supported Organizations. Answer lines 3a and 3b below.

Did the organization have the power to regularly appoint or elect a majority of the officers, directors, or trustees of each of the supported organizations?If "Yes" or "No", provide details in Part VI.

Did the organization exercise a substantial degree of direction over the policies, programs and activities of each of its supported organizations? If "Yes," describe in Part VI. the role played by the organization in this regard.

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 6

Part V

Type III Non-Functionally Integrated 509(a)(3) Supporting Organizations

Check here if the organization satisfied the Integral Part Test as a qualifying trust on Nov. 20, 1970 (explain in Part VI). See instructions. All other Type III non-functionally integrated supporting organizations must complete Sections A through E.

	Section A - Adjusted Net Income		(A) Prior Year	(B) Current Year (optional)
1	Net short-term capital gain	1
2	Recoveries of prior-year distributions	2
3	Other gross income (see instructions)	3
4	Add lines 1 through 3	4
5	Depreciation and depletion	5
6	Portion of operating expenses paid or incurred for production or collection of gross income or for management, conservation, or maintenance of property held for production of income (see instructions)	6
7	Other expenses (see instructions)	7
8	Adjusted Net Income (subtract lines 5, 6 and 7 from line 4)	8

	Section B - Minimum Asset Amount		(A) Prior Year	(B) Current Year (optional)
1	Aggregate fair market value of all non-exempt-use assets (see instructions for short tax year or assets held for part of year):	1
a	Average monthly value of securities	1a
b	Average monthly cash balances	1b
c	Fair market value of other non-exempt-use assets	1c
d	Total (add lines 1a, 1b, and 1c)	1d
e	Discount claimed for blockage or other factors (explain in detail in Part VI):
2	Acquisition indebtedness applicable to non-exempt use assets	2
3	Subtract line 2 from line 1d	3
4	Cash deemed held for exempt use. Enter 0.015 of line 3 (for greater amount, see instructions).	4
5	Net value of non-exempt-use assets (subtract line 4 from line 3)	5
6	Multiply line 5 by 0.035	6
7	Recoveries of prior-year distributions	7
8	Minimum Asset Amount (add line 7 to line 6)	8

	Section C - Distributable Amount		Current Year
1	Adjusted net income for prior year (from Section A, line 8, Column A)	1
2	Enter 85% of line 1	2
3	Minimum asset amount for prior year (from Section B, line 8, Column A)	3
4	Enter greater of line 2 or line 3	4
5	Income tax imposed in prior year	5
6	Distributable Amount. Subtract line 5 from line 4, unless subject to emergency temporary reduction (see instructions)	6

Check here if the current year is the organization's first as a non-functionally-integrated Type III supporting organization (see instructions)

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 7

Part V

Type III Non-Functionally Integrated 509(a)(3) Supporting Organizations(continued)

Section D - Distributions		Current Year
1 Amounts paid to supported organizations to accomplish exempt purposes	1
2 Amounts paid to perform activity that directly furthers exempt purposes of supported organizations, in excess of income from activity	2
3 Administrative expenses paid to accomplish exempt purposes of supported organizations	3
4 Amounts paid to acquire exempt-use assets	4
5 Qualified set-aside amounts (prior IRS approval required - provide details in Part VI)	5
6 Other distributions (describe in Part VI). See instructions	6
7Total annual distributions. Add lines 1 through 6.	7
8 Distributions to attentive supported organizations to which the organization is responsive (provide details in Part VI). See instructions	8
9 Distributable amount for 2022 from Section C, line 6	9
10 Line 8 amount divided by Line 9 amount	10

Section E - Distribution Allocations (see instructions)		(i) Excess Distributions	(ii) Underdistributions Pre-2022	(iii) Distributable Amount for 2022
1 Distributable amount for 2022 from Section C, line 6
2 Underdistributions, if any, for years prior to 2022 (reasonable cause required-- explain in Part VI). See instructions.
3 Excess distributions carryover, if any, to 2022:
a From 2017.......
b From 2018.......
c From 2019.......
d From 2020.......
e From 2021.......
fTotal of lines 3a through e
g Applied to underdistributions of prior years
h Applied to 2022 distributable amount
i Carryover from 2017 not applied (see instructions)
j Remainder. Subtract lines 3g, 3h, and 3i from line 3f.
4Distributions for 2022 from Section D, line 7:
$
a Applied to underdistributions of prior years
b Applied to 2022 distributable amount
c Remainder. Subtract lines 4a and 4b from line 4.
5 Remaining underdistributions for years prior to 2022, if any. Subtract lines 3g and 4a from line 2. If the amount is greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions.
6 Remaining underdistributions for 2022. Subtract lines 3h and 4b from line 1. If the amount is greater than zero, explain in Part VI. See instructions.
7 Excess distributions carryover to 2023. Add lines 3j and 4c.
8 Breakdown of line 7:
a Excess from 2018.....
b Excess from 2019.....
c Excess from 2020.....
d Excess from 2021.....
e Excess from 2022.....

Schedule A (Form 990) (2022)

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Page 8

Part VI

Supplemental Information. Provide the explanations required by Part II, line 10; Part II, line 17a or 17b; Part III, line 12; Part IV, Section A, lines 1, 2, 3b, 3c, 4b, 4c, 5a, 6, 9a, 9b, 9c, 11a, 11b, and 11c; Part IV, Section B, lines 1 and 2; Part IV, Section C, line 1; Part IV, Section D, lines 2 and 3; Part IV, Section E, lines 1c, 2a, 2b, 3a and 3b; Part V, line 1; Part V, Section B, line 1e; Part V Section D, lines 5, 6, and 8; and Part V, Section E, lines 2, 5, and 6. Also complete this part for any additional information. (See instructions).

Facts And Circumstances Test

Return Reference	Explanation

Schedule A (Form 990) 2022

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

Return Reference	Explanation
PART II-B, LINE 1:	1E - THROUGH DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS, THE CENTER INFORMED ITS SUPPORTERS ABOUT THE PRESENCE OF PRO-ANIMAL LEGISLATION SUCH AS THE FDA MODERNIZATION ACT AND URGED INDIVIDUALS TO REACH OUT TO THEIR FEDERAL LAWMAKERS IN SUPPORT OF THIS HUMANE-MINDED LEGISLATION. 1G - THE CENTER HIRED PUBLIC POLICY ADVOCATE FIRMS TO REACH OUT TO LAWMAKERS IN THE US HOUSE AND SENATE TO GAIN SUPPORT FOR ANIMAL WELFARE LEGISLATION BEING CONSIDERED.
PART II-B	1E - THROUGH DIGITAL COMMUNICATIONS, THE CENTER INFORMED ITS SUPPORTERS ABOUT THE PRESENCE OF PRO-ANIMAL LEGISLATION, SUCH AS THE FDA MODERNIZATION ACT AND URGED INDIVIDUALS TO REACH OUT TO THEIR FEDERAL LAWMAKERS IN SUPPORT OF THIS HUMANE-MINDED LEGISLATION. 1G - THE CENTER HIRED PUBLIC POLICY ADVOCACY FIRMS TO REACH OUT TO LAWMAKERS IN THE HOUSE AND SENATE TO GAIN SUPPORT FOR ANIMAL WELFARE LEGISLATION BEING CONSIDERED.

(a)
Check if applicable

(b)
Number of contributions or items contributed

(d)
Method of determining
noncash contribution amounts

1 Art—Works of art ....

2 Art—Historical treasures .

3 Art—Fractional interests ..

4 Books and publications ..

5 Clothing and household
goods .......

6 Cars and other vehicles ..

7 Boats and planes ....

8 Intellectual property ...

9 Securities—Publicly traded .

567,801

FMV STOCK MARKET QUOTES

10 Securities—Closely held stock .

11 Securities—Partnership, LLC,
or trust interests ....

12 Securities—Miscellaneous ..

13 Qualified conservation
contribution—Historic
structures .....

14 Qualified conservation
contribution—Other ...

15 Real estate—Residential .

16 Real estate—Commercial ..

17 Real estate—Other ...

18 Collectibles .....

19 Food inventory ...

20 Drugs and medical supplies .

21 Taxidermy ......

22 Historical artifacts ....

23 Scientific specimens ..

24 Archeological artifacts ...

25 Other Right pointing arrow large image

( )

26 Other Right pointing arrow large image

( )

27 Other Right pointing arrow large image

( )

28 Other Right pointing arrow large image

( )

- TIN:

SCHEDULE O
(Form 990)

Department of the Treasury
Internal Revenue Service

Supplemental Information to Form 990 or 990-EZ

Complete to provide information for responses to specific questions on
Form 990 or 990-EZ or to provide any additional information.
MediumBullet

Attach to Form 990 or 990-EZ.
MediumBullet

Go to www.irs.gov/Form990 for the latest information.

OMB No. 1545-0047

2021

Open to Public
Inspection

Name of the organization

CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY INC

Employer identification number

83-2620507

Return Reference	Explanation
FORM 990, PART III, LINES 1, 4A, 4B AND 4C	THERE ARE MANY PATHWAYS FOR IMPROVING THE LIVES OF ANIMALS, BUT INFLUENCING CORPORATIONS TO EMBED ANIMAL PROTECTION VALUES INTO THEIR PRODUCTION PRACTICES, SUPPLY CHAINS, MARKETING EFFORTS, AND RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES MAY BE THE MOST CONSEQUENTIAL. IN WORKING TOWARD THAT GOAL IN 2023, WE SECURED BIG GAINS IN THE SECTORS OF ANIMAL AGRICULTURE, DRUG DEVELOPMENT BY THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY, FASHION AND ATHLETIC WEAR, THE USE OF ANIMALS IN SPECTATOR SPORTS AND ENTERTAINMENT, AND IN OTHER BIG ECONOMIC DOMAINS IN SOCIETY. THE CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY CHARGED AHEAD AFTER ENGINEERING THE PASSAGE OF THE FDA MODERNIZATION ACT 2.0. THAT FEDERAL POLICY, DEVELOPED IN EARLY 2021 AND ENACTED INTO FEDERAL LAW BY THE END OF 2022, LIFTED AN ANIMAL-TESTING MANDATE THAT HAD BEEN IN PLACE FOR 84 YEARS. OUR WINNING CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN REMINDED PEOPLE OF THE LIMITS OF ANIMAL TESTING AND THE PROMISE OF HUMAN BIOLOGY, TO USHER IN THE PROSPECT OF A NEW, SAFER, AND BETTER PARADIGM FOR SCREENING DRUGS FOR HUMAN WELL-BEING. FOR INSTANCE, LIVER-ON-A-CHIP OR KIDNEY-ON-A-CHIP METHODS OF DRUG-SCREENING MARK AN ENORMOUS LEAP FORWARD TO MORE PREDICTIVE AND RELIABLE SCREENING METHODS, REPLACING ANIMAL MODELS THAT HAVE PROVED UNRELIABLE IN TRANSLATION OF THEIR RESULTS. THE CHANGES IN AGRICULTURE WE HELPED PUSH FORWARD IN 2023 WERE SIMILARLY CONSEQUENTIAL THOUGH GROUNDED ON VERY SIMPLE AND COMMON-SENSE NORMS ABOUT THE PROPER TREATMENT OF ANIMALS. WHEN THE U.S. SUPREME COURT UPHELD PROP 12 AS A CONSTITUTIONALLY SOUND ANIMAL-HOUSING POLICY, IT WAS A LANDMARK WIN FOR US, REINFORCING THE NOTION THAT IT IS PROPER AND CONSTITUTIONALLY SOUND FOR STATES TO HALT SELLING PORK AND EGGS FROM FACTORY FARMS THAT IMMOBILIZE THE ANIMALS AS A ROUTINE ANIMAL-HOUSING STRATEGY. AND IT WAS BIG NEWS, TOO, WHEN THE USDA STIPULATED THAT THE ORGANIC SEAL WOULD GUARANTEE A SET OF ANIMAL WELFARE STANDARDS FOR ANIMALS RAISED UNDER THAT LABEL. BOTH THE HIGH-COURT DECISION AND THE FEDERAL-AGENCY ACTION WERE TWO HUGE STEPS IN OUR LONG MARCH TOWARD A CAGE-FREE FUTURE IN AGRICULTURE. THEN, ADD IN THE SEISMIC CHANGE IN OUR THREE-YEAR KANGAROOS ARE NOT SHOES CAMPAIGN TO SPARE THE MARSUPIALS FROM HORRIFIC SLAUGHTER IN THEIR NATIVE HABITATS JUST TO MAKE SHOES. WE CLINCHED THE CASE WITH NIKE, PUMA, AND THEN NEW BALANCE, WHICH PLEDGED TO US IN 2023 THAT THEY'D STOP SOURCING KANGAROOS TO MAKE SOCCER CLEATS. ALSO IN 2023, WE BUILT MAJOR MOMENTUM IN OUR SERIOUS-MINDED EFFORTS TO CLOSE OUT INDUSTRIES THAT HAVE BEEN WITH US FOR LONGER THAN ANY OF US HAVE LIVED: HORSE SLAUGHTER FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION, GREYHOUND RACING FOR GAMBLING, AND DOGFIGHTING AND COCKFIGHTING FOR THE THRILL OF THE BLOODLETTING. NO LONGER IS THE USE OF ANIMALS A NEUTRAL ACTION, BUT ONE FREIGHTED WITH MORAL CONCERN AND GROWING CONTROVERSY. AND THE CENTER, THE FIRST ORGANIZATION IN THE FIELD OF ANIMAL PROTECTION SOLELY FOCUSED ON INFLUENCING THE WORKING OF BUSINESS TO FORGE A HUMANE ECONOMIC ORDER, IS ALL ABOUT REMINDING CORPORATIONS THAT THEY OPERATE WITHIN A SOCIAL CULTURE THAT ABHORS CRUELTY AND AN ECONOMIC CULTURE THAT EMBRACES INNOVATION. ONE NEED ONLY LOOK AT THE DISSOLUTION IN RECENT YEARS OF RINGLING BROTHERS CIRCUS (A PRIVATE COMPANY) OR THE FORTUNES OF SEAWORLD (A PUBLICLY-TRADED ONE) AFTER FACING CONTROVERSY AND CONCERN ABOUT THE COMPANIES' USES OF ANIMALS IN ENTERTAINMENT. OR, TO TAKE A MORE POSITIVE FRAME, ONE CAN LOOK AT THE INCREASING NUMBER OF COSMETIC COMPANIES MARKETING THEIR PRODUCTS WITH A "NO ANIMAL TESTING" PROMISE OR THE FASHION COMPANIES, FROM ARMANI TO GUCCI, THAT HAVE FORSWORN FUR AND SWITCHED TO ALTERNATIVE TEXTILES IN THEIR GARMENTS. THE COMPANIES EMBRACING ANIMAL PROTECTION ARE POSITIONING THEMSELVES MORE FAVORABLY IN A CULTURE WHERE CONSUMERS ARE ALERT TO ANIMAL PROTECTION. AS INDIVIDUALS AND AS A SOCIETY, WE MUST FEED AND CLOTHE OURSELVES, FULFILL OUR ENERGY AND TRANSPORTATION NEEDS, ENJOY FAMILY AND PURSUE RECREATIONAL EXPERIENCES AND VENTURES, AND REALIZE OTHER QUALITY-OF-LIFE METRICS. TO DO THAT AND TO RESPECT ANIMALS, WE NEEDN'T TURN BACK THE CLOCK AND REVERT TO LIFESTYLES THAT RESEMBLE THOSE OF 1950 OR 1850 OR SOME EARLIER GENERATION. RATHER, BY EMBRACING INNOVATION AND HUMAN INGENUITY, WE COMMIT OURSELVES TO CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT WITHOUT CAUSING MASSIVE COLLATERAL IMPACTS ON ANIMALS AND THE PLANET AND ITS AIR, WATER, FORESTS AND SOIL. INDEED, NO RESPONSIBLE BUSINESS LEADER SHOULD FIND IT ACCEPTABLE TO HURT ANIMALS AS A ROUTINE BUSINESS PRACTICE. IN AN ERA WHERE WE'VE HAD REVOLUTIONS IN THOUGHT IN SOCIETY AND IN THE WORKPLACE IN SO MANY REALMS, IT IS ALSO TIME FOR BUSINESS TO COME TO TERMS WITH THE WIDELY ACCEPTED ETHOS OF TREATING ANIMALS PROPERLY. INDEED, OPPOSITION TO ANIMAL CRUELTY HAS BEEN PART OF AMERICAN CULTURE AND LAW FOR MORE THAN 170 YEARS. OUR ECONOMIC HISTORY IS A LITANY OF DRAMATIC AND ALMOST UNIMAGINABLE CHANGES THAT BECAME MAINSTREAM AND HAVE UPGRADED HUMAN EXISTENCE, FROM THE PRINTING PRESS TO DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY, FROM HUMAN FLIGHT TO THE MORE GROUNDED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE FOR THE AUTOMOBILE, WHICH LIBERATED HORSES FROM THE DAILY GRINDS OF LABOR FOR TRANSPORT AND COMMERCE. LOOKING FORWARD TO WHAT INNOVATION MEANS FOR ANIMALS, THE HUMANE ECONOMY, A BOOK BY PRESIDENT WAYNE PACELLE, STATES: "JUST ABOUT EVERY ENTERPRISE BUILT ON HARMING ANIMALS TODAY IS RIPE FOR DISRUPTION. WHERE THERE IS A FORM OF COMMERCIAL EXPLOITATION, THERE IS AN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY WAITING FOR A BUSINESS DOING LESS HARM OR NO HARM AT ALL. FACTORY FARMING, FOR EXAMPLE, IS THE CREATION OF HUMAN RESOURCEFULNESS DETACHED FROM CONSCIENCE. WHAT INNOVATIONS IN AGRICULTURE MIGHT COME ABOUT BY HUMANE RESOURCEFULNESS GUIDED BY CONSCIENCE?" FOR ALL THE THINGS WE DO, WE WANT TO DRIVE BETTER OUTCOMES FOR ANIMALS THROUGH A COMBINATION OF MORAL PURPOSE AND HUMAN INNOVATION. THESE FORCES WILL CAST CRUELTY ASIDE, LEADING US INTO A NEWLY ENERGIZED ECONOMY AND A NEW SET OF SOCIAL NORMS WHEN IT COMES TO OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH ANIMALS. MAJOR BREAK: ANIMAL WELFARE CAMPAIGNS IN ACTION WHILE OUR WORK IS NEVER COMPLETE, AND THE RISKS THAT ANIMALS FACE MEAN THAT OUR WORK IS URGENT EVERY DAY AND EVERY YEAR, THERE WAS UNMISTAKABLE PROGRESS IN 2023. WE EXECUTED ON MAJOR CAMPAIGNS TO DRIVE LASTING CHANGE, REORIENTING THE PUBLIC DEBATE ABOUT THE USE OF ANIMALS, AND ASKING LAWMAKERS AND CORPORATE LEADERS TO RETHINK PAST ASSUMPTIONS AND TO FORCE A NEW, SAFER, BETTER RELATIONSHIP WITH ANIMALS. CAMPAIGN: KANGAROOS AREN'T SHOES THREE BIG BRANDS ANNOUNCED PLANS TO GET OUT OF THE KANGAROO-SOURCING BUSINESS THE CENTER SECURED MONUMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT WINS WHEN WE WON COMMITMENTS FROM PUMA, NIKE, AND NEW BALANCE TO HALT THEIR SOURCING OF KANGAROO SKINS FOR ATHLETIC SHOES. A FOURTH BIG BRAND, THE ITALY-BASED DIADORA, COMMITTED TO THAT SAME POLICY IN 2021, LEAVING ADIDAS AS THE OUTLIER AMONG THE MAJOR NAMES IN ATHLETIC SHOES. SINCE THE LAUNCH OF OUR KANGAROOS ARE NOT SHOES CAMPAIGN IN 2019, THE COMMERCIAL SLAUGHTER OF KANGAROOS HAS DECLINED BY MORE THAN 700,000 ANIMALS, BASED ON THE GOVERNMENT'S CRUDE ESTIMATES. FOR DECADES, THE MASS KILLING OF KANGAROOS IN THEIR NATIVE HABITATS HAS BEEN THE BIGGEST COMMERCIAL SLAUGHTER OF WILDLIFE IN THE WORLD. OUR CAMPAIGN WINS WERE PICKED UP WIDELY, FROM THE DAILY MAIL AND THE GUARDIAN IN THE UNITED KINGDOM, TO YAHOO.COM IN AUSTRALIA, TO REUTERS AND A LETTER IN THE NEW YORK TIMES IN THE UNITED STATES. WIRE STORIES WERE PICKED UP AND PUT INTO DIFFERENT LANGUAGES ACROSS THE WORLD, CONSISTENT WITH THE REACH OF THE EXTRAORDINARY NIKE BRAND. OUR FRIENDS AND PARTNERS AT THEIR TURN CONDUCTED MULTIPLE PROTESTS AT ADIDAS FLAGSHIP STORES IN NEW YORK CITY, ENTERING THE STORES AND DEMANDING THE COMPANY HALT ITS FINANCING OF KANGAROO KILLING IN AUSTRALIA. ACTOR JAMES CROMWELL JOINED THE PROTEST, CHANTING THAT "KANGAROOS ARE NOT SHOES" IN THE STORE AND ALERTING CUSTOMERS TO ADIDAS'S ROLE IN A CRUEL WILDLIFE TRADE. WE ALSO PARTNERED WITH LAWMAKERS FROM AUSTRALIA'S ANIMAL JUSTICE PARTY WHO JOINED US ON CAPITOL HILL IN SUPPORT OF THE KANGAROO PROTECTION ACT. CAMPAIGN: MODERNIZE TESTING A HUMANE ECONOMY DOESN'T HARM LIVE ANIMALS WHEN ALTERNATIVES EXIST THE USE OF ANIMALS IN ANIMAL TESTING HAS BEEN ENSHRINED IN AMERICAN LAW FOR NEARLY 100 YEARS. AND WITH GLOBAL PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY PRACTICES DRIVEN BY AMERICAN LAW, ANIMAL TESTING HAS BEEN A CAUSE OF SUFFERING FOR BEAGLES, PRIMATES, AND DOZENS OF OTHER SPECIES ALL ACROSS THE WORLD, WITH TENS OF MILLIONS OF ANIMALS UNDER THE KNIFE AND AT RISK EVERY YEAR. IN 2022-23, THE CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY, WITH SUPPORT FROM ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION, HAS PROPELLED MONUMENTAL CHANGES IN THE BIGGEST CATEGORY OF ANIMAL TESTING: SCREENING OF DRUGS WITH THE USE OF MILLIONS OF ANIMALS.
FORM 990, PART III, LINES 1, 4A, 4B AND 4C - CONTINUED	THE BIGGEST WIN ON ANIMAL TESTING IN THE HISTORY OF THE ANIMAL PROTECTION MOVEMENT CAME BY OUR SHEPHERDING TO FINAL PASSAGE THE FDA MODERNIZATION ACT 2.0 IN THE LAST DAYS OF 2022. THAT BILL, AND A COMPANION MEASURE CALLED THE REDUCING ANIMAL TESTING ACT, ELIMINATED A FEDERAL MANDATE FOR ANIMAL TESTING FOR NEW DRUGS AND FOR BIOSIMILARS. THE PASSAGE OF THE LAW IS LEADING TO A CULTURAL SHIFT IN THE REALMS OF SCIENCE AND PUBLIC HEALTH IN THE UNITED STATES AND ABROAD. MORE THAN 500 ARTICLES HAVE BEEN PUBLISHED ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE FDA MODERNIZATION ACT 2.0, INCLUDING IN THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION JOURNAL AND FORBES. IN 2023, THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA PASSED ITS OWN VERSION OF THE FDA MODERNIZATION ACT, WHICH AUTHORIZES RESEARCHERS TO USE NON-ANIMAL AND HUMAN-RELEVANT METHODS INSTEAD OF ANIMALS. A SIMILAR EFFORT IS UNDERWAY IN THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA. A MARKETING RESEARCH REPORT SHOWS THAT 55% OF INDUSTRY RESPONDENTS SAID THAT THE FDA MODERNIZATION ACT 2.0 IS DRIVING EXPLORATION INTO HUMAN CELL MODELS, AND ADDITIONAL RESEARCH SHOWS THAT ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TEST ARE BEING USED IN ABOUT 70% OF COMPANIES. OTHER NATIONS THROUGHOUT THE WORLD ARE LOOKING TO EMULATE U.S. POLICY AND FIND A SAFER, LESS COSTLY, MORE EFFECTIVE PATHWAY FOR SCREENING DRUGS. ANIMAL TESTS, IN LARGE PART, ARE NOT PREDICTIVE OF THE HUMAN RESPONSE TO DRUGS, WITH 90 TO 95% OF DRUGS AND VACCINES FOUND SAFE IN ANIMAL TESTS FAILING DURING HUMAN CLINICAL TRIALS. THE COST FOR DEVELOPING A SINGLE NEW DRUG MAY BE FROM $1 - $6 BILLION, AND THE AVERAGE TIMELINE OF DEVELOPMENT OF A POTENTIAL DRUG AND VACCINE FROM THE LAB TO MARKET IS 10-15 YEARS. MOST DISEASES HAVE NO TREATMENT AVAILABLE. AND LOOKING AT IT THROUGH A DIFFERENT LENS, THE DRUGS WE'VE GOT ARE OFTEN A THREAT TO HUMAN WELL-BEING, AS ADVERSE DRUG REACTIONS ARE THE FOURTH HIGHEST CAUSE OF DEATH IN THE UNITED STATES. USE OF HUMAN BIOLOGY-BASED TEST METHODS WOULD BETTER PREDICT HOW HUMANS WILL RESPOND TO DRUGS IN CLINICAL TRIALS. AS WE TURNED INTO 2023, WE BEGAN WORKING ON IMPLEMENTATION AND TO SPREAD THE IDEA AROUND THE WORLD, SINCE THE USE OF ANIMALS IN DRUG SCREENING FOR SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS IS A WORLDWIDE INDUSTRY. WE ARE PRESSING THE FDA TO UPDATE ITS REGULATIONS GIVEN THE ENACTMENT OF THE NEW LAW AND ENSURE THAT THE AGENCY MOVES SWIFTLY TOWARD QUALIFICATION AND REGULATORY ACCEPTANCE OF NON-ANIMAL METHODS, AND THAT WORK CONTINUES ROBUSTLY IN 2024. CAMPAIGN: CREATING A CAGE-FREE FUTURE FARM ANIMALS GRANTED ROOM TO MOVE AS APPROVED HUMANE STANDARD. ORGANIC LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY STANDARDS CODIFIED. THE CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY'S PRESIDENT, WAYNE PACELLE, HAS BEEN THE COUNTRY'S MOST EFFECTIVE SPOKESPERSON AND AGENT OF CHANGE FOR TRANSFORMATION AWAY FROM INHUMANE AND CRUEL FACTORY FARMS AND TOWARD A MORE HUMANE ECONOMY. AT WORK AT THE CENTER'S AFFILIATE ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION, PACELLE WAS A KEY ARCHITECT OF THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT BALLOT MEASURES FOR FARM ANIMALS IN U.S. HISTORY: PROPOSITION 12 IN CALIFORNIA, PASSED IN 2018 BY THE VOTERS, AND QUESTION 3 IN MASSACHUSETTS, ENSHRINED INTO LAW TWO YEARS EARLIER. BOTH MEASURES NOT ONLY MANDATE EXPANDED LIVING ENVIRONMENTS FOR PIGS, LAYING HENS, AND VEAL CALVES, BUT THEY ALSO RESTRICT SALES OF PORK, EGGS, AND VEAL IN THE STATES. BOTH MEASURES REQUIRE THE SALE OF CRATE-FREE PORK AND CAGE-FREE EGGS, NO MATTER WHERE THE PRODUCTION OCCURS. THE NATIONAL PORK PRODUCERS AND THEIR ALLIES CAMPAIGNED AGAINST BOTH MEASURES, AND THEY LOST BADLY AT THE BALLOT BOX-BY 26 PERCENTAGE POINTS IN CALIFORNIA AND BY AN ASTONISHING 56% IN MASSACHUSETTS. AFTER THEY LOST, THEY REDIRECTED THEIR ATTACKS AGAINST THE MEASURES AND WENT TO THE FEDERAL COURTS. THEY LOST EVERY CASE, BUT IN 2022, THEY WON A COMMITMENT FROM THE U.S. SUPREME COURT TO HEAR THE CASE, NPPC V. ROSS. WITHOUT ANY QUESTION, IT WAS AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT BEFORE A CONSERVATIVE COURT. THE NATIONAL PORK PRODUCERS COUNCIL (NPPC), THE AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, AND OTHER MAJOR ACTORS WANT NO FEDERAL OR STATE LEGAL STANDARDS TO PROTECT ANIMALS, AND THIS WAS THEIR MANEUVER TO WIPE OUT THE MOST IMPORTANT STATE LAWS FOR ANIMALS IN A SINGLE LEGAL PROCEEDING. BUT MUCH TO THE CHAGRIN OF BIG AGRICULTURE, A MAJORITY OF THE JUSTICES UPHELD CALIFORNIA'S PROPOSITION 12 AS CONSTITUTIONAL, PUTTING THAT MEASURE AND A SIMILAR MASSACHUSETTS STATUTE ON TRACK FOR FULL ENFORCEMENT WITHIN MONTHS. MORE BROADLY, THE DECISION, AT LEAST FOR THE MOMENT, SAFEGUARDS THE RIGHTS OF STATES TO RESTRICT AGRICULTURAL COMMERCE FOR ANIMAL WELFARE, FOOD SAFETY AND OTHER COMPELLING PURPOSES. PROP 12 BUILT ON A PRIOR VOTER-APPROVED, ANTI-CONFINEMENT MEASURE (PROP 2), ENACTED A DECADE EARLIER, THAT RESTRICTED EXTREME CONFINEMENT OF LAYING HENS, VEAL CALVES, AND BREEDING PIGS, STIPULATING THAT ANY EGGS OR PORK SOLD IN THE STATE COME FROM ANIMALS AFFORDED SUFFICIENT SPACE TO MOVE AROUND, REGARDLESS OF WHERE THE ANIMALS ARE RAISED. QUESTION 3 IN MASSACHUSETTS WAS SIMILAR IN CONSTRUCTION. (THE CURRENT LEADERSHIP AT ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION HAD PLAYED A CENTRAL ROLE IN INITIATING THOSE TWO BALLOT MEASURES AND THE THREE PRIOR WINNING FARM-ANIMAL PROTECTION MEASURES APPROVED BY VOTERS BETWEEN 2002-2021.) IN SIDING WITH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN ITS DEFENSE OF PROP 12, JUSTICE NEIL GORSUCH, JOINED BY JUSTICES CLARENCE THOMAS, SONJA SOTOMAYOR, AMY CONEY BARRETT, AND ELENA KAGAN, DETERMINED THAT THE NATIONAL PORK PRODUCERS "INVITE US TO FASHION TWO NEW AND MORE AGGRESSIVE CONSTITUTIONAL RESTRICTIONS ON THE ABILITY OF STATES TO REGULATE GOODS SOLD WITHIN THEIR BORDERS. WE DECLINE THAT INVITATION. WHILE THE CONSTITUTION ADDRESSES MANY WEIGHTY ISSUES, THE TYPE OF PORK CHOPS CALIFORNIA MERCHANTS MAY SELL IS NOT ON THAT LIST." THE MOST CONSEQUENTIAL HIGH-COURT RULING IN THE HISTORY OF THE ANIMAL WELFARE MOVEMENT WAS WIDELY COVERED, FROM THE DES MOINES REGISTER TO THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE. OUR TEAM HAS HAD OP-EDS PUBLISHED IN MORE THAN 15 NEWSPAPERS, FROM THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER TO THE WORCESTER TELEGRAM GAZETTE, AND HAS CALLED ON STATE OFFICIALS IN MASSACHUSETTS AND CALIFORNIA TO PROCEED WITH RESOLVE TO IMPLEMENT MEASURES ADOPTED BY VOTERS IN 2016 AND 2018, RESPECTIVELY. THE LAWS' PROVISIONS BARRING THE SALE OF VEAL AND EGGS FROM ANIMALS KEPT IN EXTREME CONFINEMENT HAD ALREADY BEEN IN EFFECT. AS WE EXPECTED, THE DEBATE THEN MOVED IMMEDIATELY TO CONGRESS, WHERE LAWMAKERS ALIGNED WITH THE PORK INDUSTRY PUSHED THE SO-CALLED EXPOSING AGRICULTURAL TRADE SUPPRESSION (EATS) ACT TO NULLIFY PROP 12 AND OTHER STATE LAWS RESTRICTING AGRICULTURAL COMMERCE. MAKE NO MISTAKE, THE EATS ACT IS AN ATTACK ON AMERICAN ELECTIONS, AND IT WILL HURT THOUSANDS OF FARMERS WHO HAVE INVESTED IN MORE ANIMAL-HOUSING SYSTEMS AND PLANNED ON ACCESSING THE REVAMPED MARKETS IN CALIFORNIA AND MASSACHUSETTS. CHINA WILL BE THE BIGGEST BENEFICIARY IF EATS WERE TO PASS, GIVEN THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY CONTROLS MORE THAN A QUARTER OF THE U.S. PIG INDUSTRY. CHINA HAS ALREADY BUILT A SET OF MASSIVE HIGH-RISE FACTORY FARMS IN THAT COUNTRY AND MAY TRY THE SAME HERE IF PIG FARMING IS DEREGULATED, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT EATS AIMS TO ACHIEVE. WE HAVE WORKED DILIGENTLY TO BUILD BROAD OPPOSITION TO THE EATS ACT IN CONGRESS, FROM NEARLY ALL DEMOCRATS AND FROM DOZENS OF REPUBLICANS AS WELL. THERE WERE 16 REPUBLICAN HOUSE MEMBERS WHO SENT A LETTER TO THE LEADERS OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, URGING THEM NOT TO INCLUDE THE PROVISION IN THE FARM BILL. BY THE END OF THE YEAR, MORE THAN 200 LAWMAKERS HAVE EXPLICITLY SIGNALED OPPOSITION TO THE MEASURE. WE CONTINUE TO MAKE THE CASE THAT PROP 12 IS THE RIGHT POLICY AND THAT THE PIG INDUSTRY HAS DIVERSIFIED ITS OPERATIONS OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS AND IS AMPLY PREPARED TO PROVIDE MORE HUMANELY-RAISED PORK TO CALIFORNIA AND MASSACHUSETTS RIGHT NOW. COSTCO AND DOZENS OF OTHER MAJOR FOOD RETAILERS HAVE BEEN SHIFTING THEIR PROCUREMENT PRACTICES, PURCHASING PORK AND EGGS FROM FARMERS WHO GIVE THE ANIMALS SPACE TO MOVE AND SIGNALING THE SHIFT IN THE MARKETPLACE THAT WE'VE BEEN PRESSING FOR YEARS. IN JULY, WE APPLAUDED NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR PHIL MURPHY AND DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE FOR ENACTING AN ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION-BACKED MEASURE TO BAN GESTATION CRATES TO HOUSE BREEDING SOWS. THE SENATE VOTED 35 TO 1 AND THE ASSEMBLY 73-1 IN FAVOR OF THE BAN. THAT MADE 11 STATES WITH GESTATION-CRATE BANS, INCLUDING COMPREHENSIVE MEASURES IN CALIFORNIA AND MASSACHUSETTS THAT INCORPORATE SALES RESTRICTIONS ON FACTORY-FARMED PORK THAT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT UPHELD IN MAY AS CONSTITUTIONALLY SOUND. ALSO LAST YEAR, WE APPLAUDED THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S RELEASE OF ITS FINAL ORGANIC LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY STANDARDS (OLPS) RULE-A REGULATORY REGIMEN THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN FEDERAL LAW ESTABLISHES SPECIFIC LEGAL STANDARDS FOR AT LEAST 60 MILLION ANIMALS USED IN PRODUCTION AGRICULTURE.
FORM 990, PART III, LINES 1, 4A, 4B AND 4C - CONTINUED	THE FARM ANIMAL WELFARE STANDARDS WILL APPLY TO ANIMALS RAISED UNDER AN ORGANIC STANDARDS" REGIMEN, ASSURING CONSUMERS THAT THE ANIMALS RAISED ON ORGANIC FARMS ARE NOT IMMOBILIZED IN CAGES OR CRATES, SUBJECTED TO ROUTINE MUTILATIONS, DENIED ACCESS TO PASTURE FOR MEANINGFUL PERIODS OF THEIR LIVES, OR OTHERWISE TREATED IN WAYS INIMICAL TO THEIR WELL-BEING. THIS IS AN EAGERLY AWAITED RULE, WITH TWO DECADES OF DELAYS FROM THE USDA AND INTERFERENCE FROM FACTORY-FARMING INTERESTS. CAMPAIGN: ANIMAL FIGHTING IS THE PITS UNPRECEDENTED ACTIONS TAKEN TO SHUT DOWN ILLEGAL, STAGED ANIMAL FIGHTING IN 2023, THERE WAS NEVER MORE ACTIVITY AGAINST ANIMAL FIGHTING THANKS TO OUR RELENTLESS CAMPAIGNING. THIS IS AN "INDUSTRY OR AN "ENTERPRISE" THAT SIMPLY SHOULD NOT EXIST. OUR GOAL IS TO WIPE IT OUT, AND WE ARE JOINED IN THAT CRUSADE BY OUR PARTNERS AT SHOWING ANIMALS RESPECT AND KINDNESS (SHARK), WHO, LIKE US, BRING A TENACIOUS ATTITUDE TOWARD PULLING ANIMAL FIGHTING UP BY THE ROOTS. WE WORKED TO SHUT DOWN FIGHTING PITS ACROSS THE NATION, EXPOSE THE PEOPLE AND PLAYERS BEHIND THE ENTERPRISES, AND CREATE A SENSE OF URGENCY THAT ALL OF THESE STAGED FIGHTS MUST END ONCE AND FOR ALL. ANIMAL FIGHTING TRULY IS THE PITS, WHETHER IT IS DOGS FIGHTING TO THE DEATH, OR ROOSTERS WITH ICEPICK-LIKE RAZORS STRAPPED TO THEIR LEGS TO SLICE ONE ANOTHER AND CREATE SUFFERING TO THE END OF EVERY BLOODY BATTLE. IN 2023, WE SAW THE UNITED STATES TAKE UP MORE DOGFIGHTING CASES THAN EVER BEFORE. BUILDING ON OUR WORK IN 2018 THAT ESTABLISHED A NATIONAL BAN ON ANIMAL FIGHTING, INCLUDING IN THE U.S. TERRITORIES OF PUERTO RICO AND GUAM, OUR AFFILIATE ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION INTRODUCED THE FIGHTING INHUMANE GAMBLING AND HIGH-RISK TRAFFICKING (FIGHT) ACT, H.R. 2742 AND S. 1529, TO AMP UP FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT TOOLS AND CAPACITY SO LAW ENFORCEMENT CAN RUN TO GROUND EVERY DOGFIGHTING AND COCKFIGHTING PIT AND BREEDING OPERATION IN OUR NATION. DESPITE LAWS AGAINST THE SCOURGES OF DOGFIGHTING AND COCKFIGHTING, WE HAVE HUNDREDS OF ILLEGAL FIGHTING PITS IN THE UNITED STATES, AND ANIMAL FIGHTERS BREED HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF ANIMALS FOR PITS FROM MEXICO TO THE PHILIPPINES. IN OKLAHOMA, THE COCKFIGHTERS BOLDLY CAME OUT OF THE SHADOWS, FORMED A POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE, AND WORKED TO LAUNCH A LEGISLATIVE CAMPAIGN TO GUT PENALTIES FOR ANIMAL FIGHTING. WE MET THEM HEAD ON AND DEFEATED THEM, AS THEIR THREE PRIMARY PRO-ANIMAL FIGHTING BILLS DIED. IN THE PROCESS, WE CONDEMNED OKLAHOMA GOV. KEVIN STITT FOR RELEASING A VIDEO TO "CHEER THEM [COCKFIGHTERS] ON FROM THE SIDELINES." BIG NAMES IN OKLAHOMA POLITICS AND SPORT-FORMER REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR FRANK KEATING, ATTORNEY GENERAL DREW EDMONDSON, AND LEGENDARY OKLAHOMA FOOTBALL COACH BARRY SWITZER-JOINED US IN URGING THE GOVERNOR TO STOP GIVING SUPPORT TO THESE CRIMINALS. OUR WORK THERE WAS HEADLINE NEWS IN THE OKLAHOMAN AND TULSA WORLD AND ALSO RECEIVED MAJOR BILLING IN THE NEW YORK POST, THE GUARDIAN, THE DAILY MAIL, DAILY BEAST, AND THE HILL WHEN YOUTUBE REMOVED THE GOVERNOR'S VIDEO BECAUSE IT VIOLATED THE COMPANY'S COMMUNITY STANDARDS PROMOTING CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. NONDOC GOT THE GOVERNOR'S TEAM ON RECORD THAT HE OPPOSES COCKFIGHTING AND ANY EFFORT TO WEAKEN THE STATE'S VOTER-APPROVED LAW. IN DELAWARE, WITH ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION SUPPORTING THE FIELD INVESTIGATIONS OF SHOWING ANIMALS RESPECT AND KINDNESS (SHARK), A SINGLE ANIMAL-SERVICES OFFICER BROKE UP A COCKFIGHTING DERBY IN PROGRESS. WE PARTNERED WITH SHARK ON A WIDE VARIETY OF INVESTIGATIONS IN ALABAMA, KENTUCKY, OKLAHOMA, AND OTHER STATES. THERE HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATIONS AND ARRESTS IN A GROWING NUMBER OF STATES, INCLUDING ARIZONA, CALIFORNIA, DELAWARE, KENTUCKY, OKLAHOMA, SOUTH CAROLINA, TEXAS AND VIRGINIA. OUR VETERINARY EXPERTS ARE MAKING THEIR CASE IN MAJOR AGRICULTURAL STATES, SUCH AS IDAHO, NEBRASKA AND SOUTH DAKOTA, THAT ANIMAL FIGHTING BEARS NO RESEMBLANCE TO ACCEPTED AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES AND THAT ANIMAL FIGHTING IS BOUND UP WITH A WIDE RANGE OF OTHER ORGANIZED CRIMINAL OPERATIONS. CAMPAIGN: GREYHOUND RACING IN THE UNITED STATES RETREAT OF SIMULCASTING OF GREYHOUND RACING AT HOME WITH JUST TWO LIVE-RACING VENUES REMAINING IN THE UNITED STATES-BOTH IN WEST VIRGINIA-WE ARE SEEING MAJOR GAMBLING COMPANIES STOP SIMULCASTING RACES FROM OTHER NATIONS, CUTTING OFF PROFITS TO THESE FOREIGN TRACKS. WITH OUR AFFILIATE ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION'S GREYHOUND PROTECTION ACT BUILDING BIPARTISAN SUPPORT-WHICH BANS LIVE RACING AND SIMULCASTING-THE LEGISLATION MAY COMPLETE WHAT WE AND GREY2K USA HAVE PREVIOUSLY SET IN MOTION. WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH GREY2K USA TO END THIS CENTURY-LONG ERA OF PUTTING GREYHOUNDS AT RISK FOR RACING PURPOSES. CAMPAIGN: END HORSE SLAUGHTER KEEPING HORSES IN THE STABLE AND OFF THE TABLE AN INVESTIGATION BY THE CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY AND ANIMALS' ANGELS REVEALED IMMENSE SUFFERING OF HORSES AND OTHER EQUIDS DURING TRANSPORTATION, HOLDING AND SLAUGHTER, WITH RESULTS SHOWING A LACK OF CARE, DEFICIENT DELIVERY OF FOOD OR WATER, AND TRANSPORT IN CRAMPED, DANGEROUS, AND UNSANITARY CONDITIONS. IN 2023, OUR AFFILIATE ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION HELPED TIP THE SCALES EVEN MORE DECIDEDLY IN OUR DIRECTION AS NEW YORK STATE JOINED CALIFORNIA, ILLINOIS, NEW JERSEY AND TEXAS IN BANNING HORSE SLAUGHTER FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION, UNDERSCORING THAT BIG BORDER STATES WANT TO END THE LIVE EXPORT OF HORSES FOR SLAUGHTER TO CANADA AND MEXICO. THE STATE LAWS ARE, HOWEVER, NO SUBSTITUTE FOR A FEDERAL BAN, GIVEN THAT OUR GOAL IS TO HALT ALL EXPORTS OF HORSES BOUND FOR SLAUGHTER. U.S. SENS. ROBERT MENENDEZ, D-N.J., AND LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-S.C., REINTRODUCED ANTI-HORSE SLAUGHTER LEGISLATION JUST MONTHS AFTER WE PARTNERED WITH ANIMALS' ANGELS FOR THE REPORT. A HOUSE COMPANION BILL, ALSO REWRITTEN TO GO TO THE AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE, HAS STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT, AND WE ARE SEEKING TO ATTACH THE SAFE ACT TO THE 2023 FARM BILL. WE'VE WON ENORMOUS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT IN BOTH CHAMBERS OF CONGRESS FOR A COMPREHENSIVE BAN ON HORSE SLAUGHTER, AND THIS IS OUR MOMENT TO COMPLETE THE JOB. WE CONTINUE TO PILE ON SUPPORT FOR NATIONAL LEGISLATION TO HALT LIVE EXPORTS OF HORSES FOR SLAUGHTER, WITH MORE THAN HALF OF ALL MEMBERS OF THE U.S. HOUSE NOW PUBLICLY SIGNED ON TO LEGISLATION TO BAN HORSE SLAUGHTER FOR CONSUMPTION. THE SAFE ACT WOULD BAN THE SLAUGHTER OF U.S. HORSES FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION, INCLUDING LIVE EXPORTS TO MEXICO AND CANADA. PRESSURE FOR PASSAGE OF THE SAFE ACT IS MOUNTING JUST AS RECENTLY RELEASED USDA EXPORT DATA SHOWS THAT KILL BUYERS SHIPPED 17,997 HORSES FROM ARIZONA, NEW MEXICO, AND TEXAS TO SLAUGHTER PLANTS IN MEXICO IN 2023. SADLY, IT IS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT ANNUAL PERCENTAGE INCREASE OF LIVE EXPORTS SINCE 2012, AND THAT MEANS THAT OUR WORK TO PASS THE SAFE ACT HAS NEVER BEEN MORE IMPORTANT. ACTRESS KATHERINE HEIGL JOINED IN OUR CAMPAIGN, SPEAKING UP AND SENDING A LETTER TO PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN URGING HIM TO FIGHT AGAINST LIVE EXPORTS OF THOUSANDS OF AMERICAN HORSES FOR SLAUGHTER FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION. OUR ACTION WAS TRIGGERED BY FAVORABLE ACTION FROM PRIME MINISTER JUSTIN TRUDEAU IN CALLING FOR AN END TO CANADA'S ROLE IN EXPORTING DRAFT HORSES TO JAPAN FOR SLAUGHTER. BOTH NORTH AMERICAN LEADERS SHOULD BE ALIGNED ON THIS ISSUE. CAMPAIGN: NO DOPING IN RACING AND A 'ZERO TOLERANCE' STANDARD FOR HORSE DEATHS AT RACETRACKS NO ANIMAL SHOULD BE EXPOSED TO RISK MERELY FOR HUMAN ENTERTAINMENT IT WAS A LANDMARK YEAR WITH A NEW FEDERAL SAFETY AUTHORITY IN PLACE, FOR THE FIRST TIME IN AMERICAN HISTORY, AT FEDERAL HORSE RACING TRACKS IN THE UNITED STATES. THE HORSERACING INTEGRITY AND SAFETY AUTHORITY (AUTHORITY) BEGAN ITS WORK, AS A FOLLOW UP TO A FEDERAL LAW WE WORKED TO PASS IN 2020 AND TO REFINE IN 2022 TO PROMOTE HORSE SAFETY AT THOROUGHBRED TRACKS. BUT OUR VOICE WAS LOUD AND STRONG WHEN WE SAW ABUSES. DECLARING THAT THE "SHOW MUST NOT GO ON WITH SO MANY ATHLETES DYING ON THE FIELD OF PLAY," THE CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY CALLED ON CHURCHILL DOWNS TO TAKE AN INDEFINITE PAUSE WITH ITS LIVE-RACING SCHEDULE UNTIL IT COULD RETURN TO COMPETITION WITHOUT MORE YOUNG, FIT HORSES DYING ON THE TRACK. TWELVE HORSES DIED AT WHAT IS ARGUABLY THE NATION'S PREMIER RACING VENUE IN THE RUN-UP TO THE KENTUCKY DERBY IN LOUISVILLE, INCLUDING SEVEN IN THE WEEK PRECEDING THE BIG RACE. THE DEATHS OF YOUNG, HEALTHY, FIT HORSES PROMPTED US TO CALL ON THE AUTHORITY TO EMBRACE THE GOAL OF "NO YOUNG, HEALTHY HORSES DYING ON TRACKS IN TRAINING OR COMPETITION," WITH THE NEW AUTHORITY URGED TO SUSPEND TRAINERS WHOSE HORSES ENTER INTO COMPETITION AND DO NOT GET OFF THE TRACK ALIVE. WE ALSO CALLED ON THE AUTHORITY TO BAN THE USE OF THE WHIP.
FORM 990, PART III, LINES 1, 4A, 4B AND 4C - CONTINUED	THE SPATE OF DEATHS DREW NATIONAL ATTENTION, AND CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY WAS AT THE CENTER OF THE NATIONAL DISCUSSION, WITH A NATIONAL COLUMN FROM AN ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER, STORIES IN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, AND OTHER MAJOR OUTLETS. CRITICISM SPIKED JUST DAYS LATER AFTER A HORSE TRAINED BY BOB BAFFERT DIED AT PIMLICO IN BALTIMORE, YET THE FAMED HORSEMAN WAS ALLOWED TO RUN A HORSE LATER THAT DAY. BAFFERT CELEBRATED THE WIN WHILE THE NATION MOURNED THE LOSS OF YET ONE MORE HORSE UNDER HIS CONTROL. BY THE END OF THE YEAR, WITH HISA IN EFFECT STARTING IN MAY 2023 AT THOROUGHBRED TRACKS ACROSS THE NATION, RACING DEATHS WERE DOWN. BUT AGGRESSIVE ENFORCEMENT BY THE AUTHORITY, PRODDED BY THE CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY, WILL BE ESSENTIAL TO STOP THE PHENOMENON OF MAJOR DEATHS AT AMERICAN TRACKS. TOO OFTEN, OUR RACETRACKS HAVE TURNED INTO CRASH SITES FOR THE ANIMALS AND THEIR JOCKEYS. CAMPAIGN: CATS AREN'T TROPHIES PROTECTING MOUNTAIN LIONS, BOBCATS, AND LYNX THE CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY BELIEVES IN PROTECTION OF OUR INTRINSICALLY AND ECOLOGICALLY VALUABLE PREDATORS, AND IN PROMOTING AN INDUSTRY THAT THAT INVESTS IN THESE ANIMALS ALIVE, RATHER THAN RELEGATING THEM TO TARGETS FOR SHOOTING, TO KEEP HEADS AND HIDES. WITH SUPPORT FROM THE CENTER, ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION FORMED A NEW POLITICAL COMMITTEE IN COLORADO, CATS AREN'T TROPHIES (CATS), TO WORK TO ATTEMPT TO PLACE A MEASURE ON THE NOVEMBER 2024 BALLOT TO BAN TROPHY HUNTING OF MOUNTAIN LIONS AND TRAPPING OR HOUNDING OF BOBCATS OR LYNX. MOUNTAIN LION TROPHY HUNTERS USE A PACK OF UP TO EIGHT DOGS FITTED WITH GPS COLLARS TO KEEP TRACK OF THE PACK AS IT CHASES A FLEEING CAT UP INTO A TREE. THE "HUNTER" THEN FINDS THE LOCATION WITH HIGH-TECH TELEMETRY EQUIPMENT, WALKS UP, AND SHOOTS THE CAT OFF OF A TREE LIMB. TROPHY HUNTING GUIDES OFFER THESE "GUARANTEED" KILLS FOR A BUCKET LIST TROPHY TOM, COLLECTING FEES OF UP TO $8,000 FOR A HIGHLY COMMERCIALIZED EXERCISE FOR THEIR CLIENTS. THIS CAMPAIGN MARKS THE RETURN OF THE BALLOT INITIATIVE PROCESS IN THE ANIMAL MOVEMENT, AFTER TWO CYCLES WITH NO STATEWIDE CAMPAIGNS IN THE UNITED STATES. WITH OUR GUIDANCE, CATS WORKED TO PLACE A COLUMN IN THE DENVER POST TO FRAME THE ISSUE, AND THAT SAME PIECE RAN IN PAPERS THROUGHOUT THE STATE, INCLUDING THE GREELEY TRIBUNE, BOULDER DAILY CAMERA, AND LONGMONT TIMES CALL. TWO OF OUR SPOKESPERSONS CONDUCTED AN INTERVIEW ON KGNU RADIO, AND THE DENVER POST RAN A FEATURE ON THE CAMPAIGN, AND A COUPLE OF DAYS BEFORE THAT, SO DID THE GRAND JUNCTION SENTINEL. THIS BALLOT MEASURE WILL DRAW NATIONAL ATTENTION GIVEN THAT TROPHY HUNTERS AND TRAPPERS KILL 500 LIONS AND 2,000 BOBCATS A YEAR IN COLORADO. GETTING THE LEAD OUT FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE CONDEMNS LEAD AMMO, BUT MUST DO MORE TO STOP THE HUNTING INDUSTRY'S MASSIVE DISPERSAL OF LEAD INTO THE ENVIRONMENT THE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE ISSUED A FINAL RULE IN 2023 ASSERTING THAT THE "BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE" REVEALS THAT "LEAD AMMUNITION AND TACKLE HAVE NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON BOTH WILDLIFE AND HUMAN HEALTH." DISAPPOINTINGLY THOUGH, THE AGENCY IS PHASING OUT LEAD AMMUNITION OVER THREE YEARS ON JUST EIGHT NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGES, WHILE ALLOWING SPORT HUNTERS TO LEAVE BEHIND TONS OF LEAD ON HUNDREDS OF OTHER REFUGES THAT WILL KILL ANIMALS FROM 130-PLUS SPECIES. THE EIGHT REFUGES ARE BLACKWATER, CHINCOTEAGUE, EASTERN NECK, ERIE, GREAT THICKET, PATUXENT RESEARCH, RACHEL CARSON, AND WALLOPS ISLAND NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGES. ALL REFUGES EXCEPT CHINCOTEAGUE WILL ALSO PHASE OUT LEAD FISHING TACKLE. MORE THAN 500 PEER-REVIEWED STUDIES SHOWED DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS ON WILDLIFE, INCLUDING A CONTINENT-WIDE EFFECT ON BALD AND GOLDEN EAGLES. A STUDY, RELEASED IN JANUARY IN SCIENCE, DETERMINED THAT ABOUT HALF OF BALD EAGLES HAVE "BONE LEAD CONCENTRATIONS ABOVE THRESHOLDS FOR CHRONIC POISONING AND ONE-THIRD OF EAGLES HAD "ACUTE [LEAD] POISONING." FRAGMENTS OF LEAD AMMUNITION IN THE REMAINS (SO-CALLED "GUT PILES") OF HUNTED ANIMALS ARE HAVING POPULATION-LEVEL EFFECTS ON EAGLES, ACCORDING TO OUR STATEMENT. IN 2024, WE'LL CONTINUE WITH OUR CAMPAIGN TO HALT THE BIGGEST DRIVER OF LEAD DISPERSAL IN THE ENVIRONMENT: SPORT HUNTING. CAMPAIGN: DUNKING THE MILK MANDATE IN SCHOOLS SPARING COWS BY ELIMINATING THE FORCED ACCEPTANCE OF MILK IN SCHOOLS THE CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY, ANIMAL WELLNESS ACTION AND SWITCH4GOOD LAUNCHED A NEW CONGRESSIONAL CAMPAIGN IN 2023 TO END THE MILK MANDATE IN THE NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM AND TO GIVE KIDS A CHOICE AND COWS A BREAK. U.S. SENS. JOHN FETTERMAN, D-PA., JOHN KENNEDY, R-LA., AND CORY BOOKER, D-N.J., INTRODUCED THE ADD SOY ACT TO GIVE KIDS A NUTRITIONALLY EQUIVALENT, PLANT-BASED MILK OPTION TO COW'S MILK IN THE NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM (NSLP). REPS. TROY CARTER, D-LA., AND NANCY MACE, R-S.C., INTRODUCED THE COMPANION BILL BECAUSE PERHAPS HALF OF THE 30 MILLION KIDS PARTICIPATING IN THE NSLP ARE LACTOSE INTOLERANT. UNDER LAW, THE USDA SPENDS $1 BILLION A YEAR OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO FULFILL A "MILK MANDATE" IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, EVEN THOUGH 70-95% OF BLACK, PACIFIC ISLANDER AND ASIAN, NATIVE AMERICAN, AND LATINO INDIVIDUALS ARE LACTOSE INTOLERANT. IN FACT, THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH REPORTS THE MAJORITY OF ALL PEOPLE HAVE A REDUCED ABILITY TO DIGEST LACTOSE AFTER INFANCY, AND LACTOSE INTOLERANCE "IS ALSO VERY COMMON IN PEOPLE OF WEST AFRICAN, ARAB, JEWISH, GREEK, AND ITALIAN DESCENT." THIS "MILK MANDATE" LEADS TO MILLIONS OF KIDS GETTING ILL IN THE CLASSROOM (MAKING THE LEARNING EXPERIENCE MORE DIFFICULT) AND ALSO TO EXTRAORDINARY FOOD AND FISCAL WASTE. ACCORDING TO THE USDA'S FINDINGS, 29% OF THE CARTONS OF MILK SERVED IN OUR SCHOOLS ARE THROWN AWAY UNOPENED, SENDING AT LEAST $300-$500 MILLION IN TAX DOLLARS AND MORE THAN 100 MILLION GALLONS OF MILK DOWN THE DRAIN. THE SOY NUTRITION INSTITUTE GLOBAL "ADVOCATES FOR THE REMOVAL OF THIS SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT TO ENSURE THE FOODS AND BEVERAGES IN SCHOOL MEALS SERVE ALL CHILDREN." SOY MILK IS BETTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT THAN COW'S MILK. ONE GALLON OF COW'S MILK REQUIRES 1,000 GALLONS OF WATER TO PRODUCE, COMPARED TO 28 GALLONS OF WATER FOR A GALLON OF SOY MILK. PRODUCING SOY MILK USES LESS LAND (8%), PRODUCES FEWER EMISSIONS (31%), AND REQUIRES LESS ENERGY (23%) COMPARED TO COW'S MILK. A DAIRY COW PRODUCES 120 POUNDS OF WASTE PER DAY, WITH 9.42 MILLION COWS COLLECTIVELY GENERATING 412 BILLION POUNDS OF WASTE ANNUALLY. FIFTY YEARS AGO, A COW ON AVERAGE PRODUCED 3,621 POUNDS OF MILK A YEAR, BUT NOW THE AVERAGE COW ON A BIG PRODUCTION FACILITY PUMPS OUT AN ASTOUNDING 22,500 POUNDS. THAT UNBELIEVABLE LEVEL OF OUTPUT COMPLICATES WELLNESS-FROM ROUTINE AND PAINFUL INFLAMMATION OF THE UDDERS TO FOOT AND LEG PROBLEMS RESULTING FROM THE MASSIVE BODY MASS THEY CARRY. MANY COWS GO TO SLAUGHTER AT JUST FOUR OR FIVE YEARS OF AGE. IN APRIL 2023, 18,000 COWS DIED IN A MASSIVE FIRE AT AN INDUSTRIAL DAIRY FARM, REMINDING US OF ONE ASPECT OF THE RISKS TO THE ANIMALS. THE GOVERNMENT IS OVERREACHING BY SUBSIDIZING AND PROMOTING MILK BEYOND ITS NATURAL APPEAL TO CONSUMERS AND DENYING KIDS CHOICE IN THE LUNCHROOM AND UNNECESSARILY PUTTING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS MORE ANIMALS AT RISK.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 11B	THE PROCESS FOR REVIEWING THE FORM 990 PRIOR TO FILING INCLUDES CIRCULATION TO ALL BOARD MEMBERS AND THE PRESIDENT. IT IS ALSO CAREFULLY REVIEWED BY ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL PERSONNEL WITH EXPERIENCE IN PREPARING THIS TYPE OF DOCUMENT.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 12C	THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY, WHICH WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, IS CIRCULATED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS TO BOARD MEMBERS AND THE PRESIDENT WITH A REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE OF ANY CONFLICTS NOT KNOWN TO THE BOARD. ANY CONFLICTS THAT ARISE ARE ADDRESSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY BY THE DISINTERESTED BOARD MEMBERS.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION B, LINE 15	IN DETERMINING COMPENSATION FOR THE TOP MANAGEMENT, OFFICERS AND OTHER KEY PERSONNEL, THE ORGANIZATION TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE EXPERIENCE OF THE INCUMBENT AND COMPARABLE COMPENSATION DATA FOR SIMILAR POSITIONS WITHIN THE MARKET AREA.
FORM 990, PART VI, SECTION C, LINE 19	COPIES OF FORM 990 OR ANY GOVERNING DOCUMENTS CAN BE REQUESTED FROM THE ORGANIZATION VIA THE WEBSITE OR BY PHONE.

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 990 or 990-EZ.

Cat. No. 51056K

Schedule O (Form 990) 2021

Additional Data

Software ID:
Software Version:

1	Briefly describe the organization’s mission or most significant activities: THE CENTER IS THE FIRST NON-PROFIT ANIMAL WELFARE ORGANIZATION THAT FOCUSES ON INFLUENCING THE CONDUCT OF CORPORATIONS TO FORGE A HUMANE ECONOMIC ORDER. THE CENTER ENCOURAGES CORPORATIONS TO EMBRACE ANIMAL WELFARE AS A CORE PART OF THEIR COMMITMENT TO SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY, BY PROMOTING REFORMS IN PURCHASING PRACTICES, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS, AND OTHER OPERATIONS THAT RECOGNIZE ANIMAL WELFARE IMPERATIVES.
2	Check this box
3	Number of voting members of the governing body (Part VI, line 1a) ........	3	6
4	Number of independent voting members of the governing body (Part VI, line 1b) .....	4	6
5	Total number of individuals employed in calendar year 2021 (Part V, line 2a) ......	5	19
6	Total number of volunteers (estimate if necessary) .............	6	100
7a	Total unrelated business revenue from Part VIII, column (C), line 12 ........	7a	0
b	Net unrelated business taxable income from Form 990-T, Part I, line 11 .........	7b	0

		Prior Year	Current Year
8	Contributions and grants (Part VIII, line 1h) .........	3,084,712	2,308,789
9	Program service revenue (Part VIII, line 2g) .........	0	214,366
10	Investment income (Part VIII, column (A), lines 3, 4, and 7d ) ....	8,766	55,742
11	Other revenue (Part VIII, column (A), lines 5, 6d, 8c, 9c, 10c, and 11e)	0	0
12	Total revenue—add lines 8 through 11 (must equal Part VIII, column (A), line 12)	3,093,478	2,578,897
13	Grants and similar amounts paid (Part IX, column (A), lines 1–3 )...	55,000	0
14	Benefits paid to or for members (Part IX, column (A), line 4).....	0	0
15	Salaries, other compensation, employee benefits (Part IX, column (A), lines 5–10)	1,042,414	1,377,453
16a	Professional fundraising fees (Part IX, column (A), line 11e) .....	0	0
b	Total fundraising expenses (Part IX, column (D), line 25) 128,004
17	Other expenses (Part IX, column (A), lines 11a–11d, 11f–24e)....	734,861	953,698
18	Total expenses. Add lines 13–17 (must equal Part IX, column (A), line 25)	1,832,275	2,331,151
19	Revenue less expenses. Subtract line 18 from line 12.......	1,261,203	247,746
		Beginning of Current Year	End of Year
20	Total assets (Part X, line 16).............	1,926,681	2,534,540
21	Total liabilities (Part X, line 26).............	58,809	393,099
22	Net assets or fund balances. Subtract line 21 from line 20.....	1,867,872	2,141,441

Sign Here

	Signature of officer	Date

	Type or print name and title


4a	(Code: ) (Expenses $ 1,978,102 including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )
	KANGAROOS ARE NOT SHOES - SUCCEEDED IN HALTING USE OF KANGAROO SKINS FOR CLEATS ON ATHLETIC SHOES MADEBY PUMA, NIKE AND NEW BALANCEMODERNIZE TESTING - CONTINUED TO PROPEL CHANGES IN BIGGEST CATEGORY OF ANIMAL TESTING - SCREENING OF DRUGS - BY USING NON-ANIMAL PROTOCOLSCREATE A CAGE- FREE FUTURE - CONTINUED TO PUSH FOR GIVING FARM ANIMALS ROOM TO MOVE ABOUT FREELY ANIMAL FIGHTING IS THE PITS - CONTINUED TO WORK TO SHUT DOWN COCK FIGHTING AND DOG FIGHTINGKEEP HORSES IN THE STABLE AND OFF THE TABLE - PUSHED FOR BANNING HORSE SLAUGHTER FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTIONCATS AREN'T TROPHIES - BEGAN INITIATIVE IN COLORADO TO SUPPORT BALLOT MEASURE IN 2024 ELECTION TO BANHUNTING AND TRAPPING OF MOUNTAIN LIONS, BOBCATS AND LYNXGETTING THE LEAD OUT - ADVOCATED FOR LIMITING USE OF LEAD AMMO IN HUNTINGDUNKING THE MILK MANDATE - CAMPAIGNED TO END SCHOOL MILK MANDATE AND REPLACE COWS' MILK WITH SOY MILK FOR LACTOSE INTOLERANT CHILDREN*NO DOPING IN RACING - PRODDED THE HORSERACING INTEGRITY AND SAFETY AUTHORITY TO PROMOTE SAFETY OF HORSES ON RACE TRACKS

4b	(Code: ) (Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )












4c	(Code: ) (Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )












4d	Other program services (Describe in Schedule O.)
	(Expenses $ including grants of $ ) (Revenue $ )
4e	Total program service expenses1,978,102

1b	Sub-Total................
c	Total from continuation sheets to Part VII, Section A....
d	Total (add lines 1b and 1c)...........	70,000	0	0

1a	Federated campaigns..		1a
b	Membership dues..		1b
c	Fundraising events..		1c
d	Related organizations		1d
e	Government grants (contributions)		1e

f	All other contributions, gifts, grants, and similar amounts not included above		1f	2,308,789

g	Noncash contributions included in lines 1a - 1f:$		1g	567,801

h Total. Add lines 1a-1f.......		2,308,789

		Business Code
2a	ANIMAL WELLFARE MGMT C	541611	214,366	214,366
b
c
d
e
f	All other program service revenue.
g	Total. Add lines 2a–2f .....		214,366

3 Investment income (including dividends, interest, and othersimilar amounts) ......			52,854	52,854
4 Income from investment of tax-exempt bond proceeds
5 Royalties...........
		(ii) Personal	(i) Real
6a	Gross rents			6a
b	Less: rental expenses			6b
c	Rental income or (loss)			6c
d	Net rental income or (loss).......
		(ii) Other	(i) Securities
7a	Gross amount from sales of assets other than inventory		570,689	7a
b	Less: cost or other basis and sales expenses		567,801	7b
c	Gain or (loss)		2,888	7c
d	Net gain or (loss).........			2,888	2,888
8a	Gross income from fundraising events (not including $ of contributions reported on line 1c). See Part IV, line 18 ....
			8a
b	Less: direct expenses ...		8b
c	Net income or (loss) from fundraising events..
9a	Gross income from gaming activities. See Part IV, line 19 ...
			9a
b	Less: direct expenses ...		9b
c	Net income or (loss) from gaming activities..
10a	Gross sales of inventory, less returns and allowances ..
			10a
b	Less: cost of goods sold ..		10b
c	Net income or (loss) from sales of inventory..
Business Code			Miscellaneous Revenue
11a
b
c
d	All other revenue ....
e	Total. Add lines 11a–11d ......
12	Total revenue. See instructions.....			2,578,897	270,108	0	0

1	Grants and other assistance to domestic organizations and domestic governments. See Part IV, line 21 ....
2	Grants and other assistance to domestic individuals. See Part IV, line 22 ...........
3	Grants and other assistance to foreign organizations, foreign governments, and foreign individuals. See Part IV, lines 15 and 16. .............
4	Benefits paid to or for members .......
5	Compensation of current officers, directors, trustees, and key employees ...........	44,200	37,570	2,210	4,420
6	Compensation not included above, to disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)) and persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B) .........
7	Other salaries and wages........	1,161,584	920,352	169,045	72,187
8	Pension plan accruals and contributions (include section 401(k) and 403(b) employer contributions) ....	20,508	15,640	3,220	1,648
9	Other employee benefits .......	53,437	41,070	6,902	5,465
10	Payroll taxes ...........	97,724	77,572	14,151	6,001
11	Fees for services (non-employees):
a	Management ......
b	Legal .........	52,734	52,734
c	Accounting ...........	11,675		11,675
d	Lobbying ...........	136,964	134,919		2,045
e	Professional fundraising services. See Part IV, line 17
f	Investment management fees ......
g	Other (If line 11g amount exceeds 10% of line 25, column (A) amount, list line 11g expenses on Schedule O)	229,400	220,732	6,588	2,080
12	Advertising and promotion ....
13	Office expenses .......	21,248	12,818	715	7,715
14	Information technology ......	28,274	16,973	8,955	2,346
15	Royalties ..
16	Occupancy ...........
17	Travel ............	13,176	12,518	395	263
18	Payments of travel or entertainment expenses for any federal, state, or local public officials .
19	Conferences, conventions, and meetings ....
20	Interest ...........
21	Payments to affiliates .......
22	Depreciation, depletion, and amortization ..
23	Insurance ...	7,795	7,405	156	234
24	Other expenses. Itemize expenses not covered above (List miscellaneous expenses in line 24e. If line 24e amount exceeds 10% of line 25, column (A) amount, list line 24e expenses on Schedule O.)
a	DIRECT ANIMAL ADVOCACY	320,486	320,486
b	DONOR LIST BUILDING	115,418	92,334		23,084
c	MISCELLANEOUS	14,287	12,738	1,033	516
d	ANIMAL CAMPAIGN SUPPLIE	2,241	2,241
e	All other expenses
25	Total functional expenses. Add lines 1 through 24e	2,331,151	1,978,102	225,045	128,004
26	Joint costs. Complete this line only if the organization reported in column (B) joint costs from a combined educational campaign and fundraising solicitation. Check here if following SOP 98-2 (ASC 958-720).

1	Cash–non-interest-bearing ........		635,144	1	611,223
2	Savings and temporary cash investments .........		1,206,919	2	1,861,813
3	Pledges and grants receivable, net ......			3
4	Accounts receivable, net .............		81,435	4	55,488
5	Loans and other receivables from any current or former officer, director, trustee, key employee, creator or founder, substantial contributor, or 35% controlled entity or family member of any of these persons .......
				5
6	Loans and other receivables from other disqualified persons (as defined under section 4958(f)(1)), and persons described in section 4958(c)(3)(B) ...
				6
7	Notes and loans receivable, net ...........			7
8	Inventories for sale or use ............			8
9	Prepaid expenses and deferred charges ......		3,183	9	6,016
10a	Land, buildings, and equipment: cost or other basis. Complete Part VI of Schedule D	10a
b	Less: accumulated depreciation	10b		10c
11	Investments—publicly traded securities .			11
12	Investments—other securities. See Part IV, line 11 .....			12
13	Investments—program-related. See Part IV, line 11 ..			13
14	Intangible assets ...............			14
15	Other assets. See Part IV, line 11 ...........			15
16	Total assets. Add lines 1 through 15 (must equal line 33)...		1,926,681	16	2,534,540

17	Accounts payable and accrued expenses .....	58,809	17	93,099
18	Grants payable ...		18
19	Deferred revenue .........		19
20	Tax-exempt bond liabilities .........		20
21	Escrow or custodial account liability. Complete Part IV of Schedule D		21
22	Loans and other payables to any current or former officer, director, trustee, key employee, creator or founder, substantial contributor, or 35% controlled entity or family member of any of these persons .........
			22
23	Secured mortgages and notes payable to unrelated third parties ..		23
24	Unsecured notes and loans payable to unrelated third parties ..		24	300,000
25	Other liabilities (including federal income tax, payables to related third parties, and other liabilities not included on lines 17 - 24). Complete Part X of Schedule D		25
26	Total liabilities. Add lines 17 through 25..	58,809	26	393,099

	Organizations that follow FASB ASC 958, check here and complete lines 27, 28, 32, and 33.
27	Net assets without donor restrictions ..........	660,081	27	973,935
28	Net assets with donor restrictions ...........	1,207,791	28	1,167,506
	Organizations that do not follow FASB ASC 958, check here and complete lines 29 through 33.
29	Capital stock or trust principal, or current funds .....		29
30	Paid-in or capital surplus, or land, building or equipment fund ...		30
31	Retained earnings, endowment, accumulated income, or other funds		31
32	Total net assets or fund balances ...........	1,867,872	32	2,141,441
33	Total liabilities and net assets/fund balances ........	1,926,681	33	2,534,540

Name of organization CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY INC

Part I Contributors	Contributors (see instructions). Use duplicate copies of Part I if additional space is needed.
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
RESTRICTED	,	$ RESTRICTED	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
(a) No.	(b) Name, address, and ZIP + 4	(c) Total contributions	(d) Type of contribution
		$	Person Payroll Noncash (Complete Part II for noncash contributions.)
Schedule B (Form 990) (2022)

Name of organization CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY INC		Employer identification number 83-2620507

Part II	Noncash Property (see instructions). Use duplicate copies of Part II if additional space is needed.
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (See instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (See instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (See instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (See instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (See instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
(a) No. from Part I	(b) Description of noncash property given	(c) FMV (or estimate) (See instructions)	(d) Date received
		$
Schedule B (Form 990) (2022)


Name of organization CENTER FOR A HUMANE ECONOMY INC			Employer identification number 83-2620507
Part III Exclusively religious, charitable, etc., contributions to organizations described in section 501(c)(7), (8), or (10) that total more than $1,000 for the year from any one contributor. Complete columns (a) through (e) and the following line entry. For organizations completing Part III, enter the total of exclusively religious, charitable, etc., contributions of $1,000 or less for the year. (Enter this information once. See instructions.) $ Use duplicate copies of Part III if additional space is needed.

Limits on Lobbying Expenditures (The term "expenditures" means amounts paid or incurred.)		(b) Affiliated group totals
1a	Total lobbying expenditures to influence public opinion (grass roots lobbying) ......................
b	Total lobbying expenditures to influence a legislative body (direct lobbying) ........................
c	Total lobbying expenditures (add lines 1a and 1b) ............................................................
d	Other exempt purpose expenditures ...............................................................................
e	Total exempt purpose expenditures (add lines 1c and 1d) ..................................................
f	Lobbying nontaxable amount. Enter the amount from the following table in both columns.
	If the amount on line 1e, column (a) or (b) is:The lobbying nontaxable amount is:
	Not over $500,00020% of the amount on line 1e.
	Over $500,000 but not over $1,000,000$100,000 plus 15% of the excess over $500,000.
	Over $1,000,000 but not over $1,500,000$175,000 plus 10% of the excess over $1,000,000.
	Over $1,500,000 but not over $17,000,000$225,000 plus 5% of the excess over $1,500,000.
	Over $17,000,000$1,000,000.

g	Grassroots nontaxable amount (enter 25% of line 1f) .................................................
h	Subtract line 1g from line 1a. If zero or less, enter -0-. ................................................
i	Subtract line 1f from line 1c. If zero or less, enter -0-. ................................................
j	If there is an amount other than zero on either line 1h or line 1i, did the organization file Form 4720 reporting section 4911 tax for this year? ...................................................................................................................	Yes No

4-Year Averaging Period Under Section 501(h) (Some organizations that made a section 501(h) election do not have to complete all of the five columns below. See the separate instructions for lines 2a through 2f.)
Lobbying Expenditures During 4-Year Averaging Period
	Calendar year (or fiscal year beginning in)	(a) 2018	(b) 2019	(c) 2020	(d) 2021	(e) Total

2a	Lobbying nontaxable amount

b	Lobbying ceiling amount (150% of line 2a, column(e))

c	Total lobbying expenditures

d	Grassroots nontaxable amount

e	Grassroots ceiling amount (150% of line 2d, column (e))

f	Grassroots lobbying expenditures