Skip to content

· Public charity

In Touch Ministries Inc

In touch ministries' mission is to lead people into a growing relationship with jesus christ and to strengthen the local church.

$34M
Granted FY2021
2
Grants FY2021
1
States reached
$32M
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Religion$42MEducation$55kInternational$15k
02FY2021 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$31,900,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$145M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
IN TOUCH FOUNDATION$31,900,000
IN TOUCH MEDIA INC$2,000,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–21) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SOUTHWESTERN BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $5k → 11%MUSEUM OF THE BIBLE INC: $100k → 16%ISLAND OUTREACH: $25k → 12%GO MINISTRIES INC: $5k → 12%RZIM: $10k → 13%IN TOUCH FOUNDATION: $31.9M → 14%EMMANUEL COLLEGE INC: $50k → 16%NATIONAL RELIGIOUS BROADCASTERS: $100k → 9%GO MINISTRIES INC: $5k → 12%IN TOUCH FOUNDATION: $8.0M → 14%NATIONAL RELIGIOUS BROADCASTERS: $10k → 9%IN TOUCH MEDIA INC: $2.0M → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$40M · 3 repeat orgs$2.2M to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2021, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
6

Total granted

$40M
$205k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-1%
+69%

Still filing today

67%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.0M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’19’20’21
ReligionPhilanthropyEducationInternationalOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • IT
    IN TOUCH FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $40M · revenue -18% · 79% of their budget
  • NR
    National Religious Broadcasters
    2× · 2017–2019 · $110k · revenue +204%
  • GM
    GO MINISTRIES INC
    2× · 2017–2019 · $10k · revenue -1%

Funded once

  • MO
    MUSEUM OF THE BIBLE
    one grant, 2017 · $100k · revenue -54%
  • EU
    EMMANUEL UNIVERSITY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +33%
  • IO
    ISLAND OUTREACH INC RANDY CROWEgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +83% · 26% of their budget
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
International Impact Ministries in
Religion
2
More International Ministries

To spread the gospel of jesus christ through crusades

Religion
3
Spirit Invasion Ministries

Spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ

Religion
4
Making Jesus Known Evangelistic Ministries

Preaching the message of Jesus Christ around the world through large events.

—
5
Encounter Church

Church

Religion
6
Euromedia Missions
—
7
Walking On Water Ministries Inc

Teach the word of god

Religion
8
Emanual Ministries International
Religion
9
Christian Ministries
International
10
Korean World Mission Council
Religion
11
International Missions Support Services Inc

Minister the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Evangelize, preach and teach the Word of God and provide educational materials. Develop clean water, disaster relief, health projects, and Covid19 relief projects.

Religion
12
The Rock Ministries

To preach the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to the Nations

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is In Touch Media Inc; the most unlike its peers is Museum of the Bible. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 10 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

IN TOUCH FOUNDATION INC: $39,900,000 · PhilanthropyIN TOUCH FOUNDATION INCIN TOUCH MEDIA INC: $2,000,000 · ReligionNational Religious Broadcasters: $110,000 · Religion+2 more: $35,000 · ReligionMUSEUM OF THE BIBLE: $100,000 · OtherRAVI ZACHARIAS INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES: $10,000 · OtherSOUTHWESTERN BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $5,000 · OtherEMMANUEL UNIVERSITY INC: $50,000 · EducationWATER MISSIONS INTERNATIONAL: $14,805 · International
Philanthropy$39,900,000Religion$2,145,000Other$115,000Education$50,000International$14,805

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetIN TOUCH FOUNDATION INC: $39,900,000 over 2y, 79% of budgetIN TOUCH MEDIA INC: $2,000,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetMUSEUM OF THE BIBLE: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEMMANUEL UNIVERSITY INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetISLAND OUTREACH INC RANDY CROWE: $25,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetWATER MISSIONS INTERNATIONAL: $14,805 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA11.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization In Touch Ministries Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from In Touch Ministries Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2022
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to In Touch Ministries Inc?

    Find your warmest path to In Touch Ministries Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 10 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on In Touch Ministries’ filings →

    More from the funding graph