Skip to content
Institute for Survivor Care Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Institute for Survivor Care Inc

The institute for shelter care equips christian ministries with the knowledge, skills, tools, and community needed to provide exemplary restorative care to the sexually exploited.

$378k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
11
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $249,157, the rows itemized in this filing. The $378,165 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $129,008 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $227k
$25,000
Median grant
11
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NOMI NETWORK$25,000
RAPHA HOUSE INTERNATIONAL INC$25,000
HOPE MOBILIZATION INC$25,000
STARFISH PROJECT INCORPORATED$25,000
EL POZO DE VIDA$25,000
COMPASSION FIRST$25,000
WILLOW INTERNATIONAL$25,000
LIFE FOR THE INNOCENT$25,000
PROJECT SUMA INC$14,129
EMBERS INTERNATIONAL$13,254
MUKTI$7,867
HOPE'S CRY INTERNATIONAL$7,199
HOSEAS HEART INC$6,708
02The need
02

Does the money reach high-need areas?

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

show:

Its human-services grants (FY25–25, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%WILLOW INTERNATIONAL: $25k → 10%STARFISH PROJECT INCORPORATED: $25k → 13%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WI
MA
OR
IN
NJ
CA
CO
MO
LA
GA
TX

Grants abroad, by region: $119k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 4 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$45k · 38% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: TO PROVIDE CHRISTIAN COUNTER-TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATIONS UNRESTRICTED FUNDING TO PURSUE THEIR MISSION TO COMBAT HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND/OR CARE FOR SURVIVORS

South Asia$31k · 26% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: TO PROVIDE CHRISTIAN COUNTER-TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATIONS UNRESTRICTED FUNDING TO PURSUE THEIR MISSION TO COMBAT HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND/OR CARE FOR SURVIVORS · COMBAT HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND/OR CARE FOR SURVIVORS

North America (Canada and Mexico)$25k · 21% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: TO PROVIDE CHRISTIAN COUNTER-TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATIONS UNRESTRICTED FUNDING TO PURSUE THEIR MISSION TO COMBAT HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND/OR CARE FOR SURVIVORS

East Asia and the Pacific$18k · 15% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: TO PROVIDE CHRISTIAN COUNTER-TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATIONS UNRESTRICTED FUNDING TO PURSUE THEIR MISSION TO COMBAT HUMAN TRAFFICKING AND/OR CARE FOR SURVIVORS

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its 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
Untrafficked Inc
Human Services
2
Mukti International

Mukti is a Sanskrit word that means "freedom from oppression and exploitation". Our goal is to see women and children find pathways to freedom. We partner with organizations around Asia that are on the frontlines helping to rescue and…

Crime & Legal
3
Joy International

JOY International is dedicated to the prevention of child trafficking and to the freedom, healing, and empowerment of trafficked children, teens, and young adults worldwide.

Human Services
4
Eden Ministry

Eden Ministry seeks to advocate for trafficked victims in Asia to reach rescue and restore them from exploitation

Religion
5
Seven Sisters International

Seven Sisters International provides rehabilitative care to girls who have been rescued from trafficking and sexual abuse by offering medical and psychological services, social work, education, life skills training, job preparation, and…

Human Services
6
California Human Trafficking Investigators and Prosecuters Asso
Crime & Legal
7
Love Justice International

The mission of love justice international is driving the downfall of slavery by disrupting human trafficking in transit.

International
8
Mission 89 Inc

Fight human trafficking

—
9
Frontline Response International Inc

In the 21st century, far too many people are trapped in the darkness of sex trafficking and homelessness. frontline response is on the frontlines every day rescuing these individuals and preventing the most vulnerable in society, our…

Religion
10
Stichting Womens Initiatives for Gender Justice

Ending impunity for conflict related sexual violence

International
11
Sojourn House Inc

Sojourn House exists to defend, restore, and liberate women who have been trafficked or exploited.

Human Services
12
Angels Joy

Support victims of human trafficking.

Youth Development
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nomi Network Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hoseas Heart Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

12 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. 12 of the 13 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

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

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HOPE MOBILIZATION INC: $25,000 · Crime & LegalHOPE MOBILIZATION INCRAPHA HOUSE INTERNATIONAL INC: $25,000 · Crime & LegalRAPHA HOUSE INTERNATIONAL INCNOMI NETWORK INC: $25,000 · Crime & LegalNOMI NETWORK INCWillow International Everfree: $25,000 · Human ServicesWillow International E…Starfish Project Incorporated: $25,000 · Human ServicesStarfish Project Incor…COMPASSION FIRST: $25,000 · InternationalCOMPASSION FIRSTProject Suma Inc: $14,129 · InternationalProject Suma IncHOSEAS HEART INC: $6,708 · InternationalHOSEAS HEART INCLIFE FOR THE INNOCENT: $25,000 · ReligionLIFE FOR THE INNOCEN…Embers International: $13,254 · ReligionEmbers InternationalHOPE'S CRY INTERNATIONAL: $7,199 · ReligionHOPE'S CRY INTERNATI…El Pozo de Vida: $25,000 · PhilanthropyEl Pozo de …MUKTI: $7,867 · Other
Crime & Legal$75,000Human Services$50,000International$45,837Religion$45,453Philanthropy$25,000Other$7,867

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLIFE FOR THE INNOCENT: $25,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetEl Pozo de Vida: $25,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetHOSEAS HEART INC: $6,708 over 1y, 1.7% 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.

Rescue- Freedom Inter…Natl Christian Charit…Morgan Stanley Global…Charities Aid Foundat…American Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Rescue- Freedom InternationalWA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Rescue- Freedom International · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Institute for Survivor Care Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Institute for Survivor Care Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%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
    3get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Institute for Survivor Care Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Institute for Survivor Care 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 13 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Institute for Survivor Care’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home