· Private foundation
The Jensen Project Inc
THE ORGANIZATION EXISTS TO STOP HUMAN TRAFFICKING (SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A FULL STATEMENT).
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k11 grants · $238k
- $50k–250k24 grants · $2.6M
- $250k+5 grants · $2.1M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NATIONAL CENTER ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION | $580,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $505,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $381,409 |
| NATIONAL CHILD PROTECTION TASK FORCE INC | $350,000 |
| RIGHTS4GIRLS | $250,000 |
| NORTH TEXAS TRAFFICKING TASK FORCE | $241,882 |
| GLOBAL PEHT CORP | $241,439 |
| ALLIES AGAINST SLAVERY | $200,000 |
| NEW FRIENDS NEW LIFE | $110,000 |
| REFLECTION MINISTRIES OF TEXAS INC | $100,015 |
| THE NETWORK GROUP INC | $100,000 |
| RETHREADED INC | $100,000 |
| EMPOWER HER WORK | $100,000 |
| GENESIS - SHELTER MINISTRIES OF DALLAS | $100,000 |
| DESIGNED FOR JOY | $100,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $4.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 92% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 6% of The Jensen Project Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 23% of the giving stays in TX; read by stated purpose it is 26% — more of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
33 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 19 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.3M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- ECEDEN CENTERS4× · 2021–2024 · $699k · revenue +43%
- REREAL ESCAPE FROM THE SEX TRADE4× · 2021–2024 · $681k · revenue +15%
- MIMOTIVATING INSPIRING SUPPORTING AND SERVING SEXUALLY EXPLOITED YOUTH3× · 2021–2023 · $670k · revenue +30%
Funded once
- RFREFUGE FOR WOMEN INCone grant, 2022 · $270k · revenue -15%
- RAREACHING ABOVE HOPELESSNESS & BROKENNESS MINISTRIES INCone grant, 2022 · $226k · revenue -35%
- PHPROMISE HOUSE INCone grant, 2021 · $182k · revenue -21%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Prevention now leverages data and technology to stop human trafficking before it starts.
Human Rights Organization
Elijah Rising's mission is to end sex trafficking through prayer, awareness, intervention, and restoration.
Alive at Last helps victims of sexual exploitation and trafficking live free and discover their God-given purpose.
Human trafficking prevention and support services for victims.
Freed Life exists to eradicate human trafficking through empowering survivors, equipping communities and changing systems.
To exeucte true justice on a global scale in order to promote the restoration of humanity with mercy and compassion through strategic initiatives that focus on the
The organization's mission is to offer support for survivors of commercial sexual exploitation and human trafficking, navigating the criminal and social justice systems in the northwest region of oregon.
Unbound North Texas exists to support survivors and resource the community to fight human trafficking through Survivor Advocacy, a 24/7 Drop-In Center, and Prevention and Awareness.
Hope for Justice is a human-rights based organization committed to supporting the complex needs of victims and survivors of human trafficking, including forced labor and sexual exploitation. Our mission at Hope for Justice is bringing…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Organization for Prostitution Survivors and the most unlike its peers is Womens Justice Now. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 16 years old; the field is 16. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
63 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 63 of the 73 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds AnnieCannons Inc ↗
- Who funds REBECCA BENDER INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN STREET CENTER ↗
- Who funds Rethreaded Inc ↗
- Who funds EDEN CENTERS ↗
- Who funds REAL ESCAPE FROM THE SEX TRADE ↗
- Who funds Awaken INC ↗
- Who funds MOTIVATING INSPIRING SUPPORTING AND SERVING SEXUALLY EXPLOITED YOUTH ↗
- Who funds REST STOP MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds REFLECTION MINISTRIES OF TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL CENTER ON SEXUAL EXPLOITATION ↗
- Who funds FRONTLINE RESPONSE INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds SAFE EXIT INITIATIVE (SEI) INC ↗
- Who funds THISTLE FARMS INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL PEHT CORP PARTNERSHIP TO END HUMAN TRAFFICKING ↗
- Who funds NEW FRIENDS NEW LIFE ↗
- Who funds HOOKERS FOR JESUS ↗
- Who funds ALLIES AGAINST SLAVERY ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL CHILD PROTECTION TASK FORC ↗
- Who funds EMPOWER HER NETWORK INC DBA EMPOWERED NETWORK ↗
- Who funds Designed For Joy ↗
- Who funds REFUGE FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Givers Legacy Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds REACHING ABOVE HOPELESSNESS & BROKENNESS MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds PROMISE HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds WOMENS JUSTICE NOW ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE RESOURCE INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTER TOMORROWS INC ↗
- Who funds Solid Rock Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds Wellspring Living Inc ↗
- Who funds THORN ↗
- Who funds 3STRANDS GLOBAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Network Group Inc ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Human Investment Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Novo Foundation · Safe House Project Inc · Slave 2 Nothing Foundation · Texas Women's Foundation · Rescue- Freedom International · W P & Bulah Luse Foundation · The Dallas Foundation · Servant Foundation · The Moody Foundation · Chi Omega Education and Charity Fund of Dallas
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Jensen Project Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Global Peht Corp Partnership to End Human Trafficking — 52% of income from government
- Justice Resource Institute Inc — 48% of income from government
- Empower Her Network Inc Dba Empowered Network — 47% of income from government
- More Too Life Inc — 28% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Jensen Project Inc?
Find your warmest path to The Jensen Project 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.