Institute for Survivor Care Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 743231089
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2008
- Location
- Lagrange, KY, USA
- Phone
- 4438587796
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Family Violence Shelters
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,349,885
- Expenses
- $2,065,646
- Assets
- $1,464,942
- Liabilities
- $54,669
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JEANNE ALLERT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- JEANNE ALLERT (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $147,164 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
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.
What it reported doing in 2025
Research: ncms case management database to track client intakes/exits and progressindustry reports/studies that support issues in the field of victim careacademic publications - specific effort to translate our research for academic journalspublish annual report from the ncms databasenscl database of shelter programsprison to placement research - an 18-month demonstration project to reduce recidivism of exploited women who have experienced incarceration
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 93
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 74.8%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 84.4%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Limited
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Limited
- Conducts site visits: Limited
- Requires grant agreements: Limited
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 12.1%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.71; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.1%; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 74.8% of revenue deployed · 84.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $147K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 31 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 13 filed related-organization links
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 44/100.