Human Trafficking Legal Center

What it reported doing in 2025

Advocacy: in 2025, htlc advocated for protections for trafficking survivors, as well as access to justice. The organization advocated for uscis to approve t visas, a form of immigration relief reserved for trafficking survivors. Htlc led an advocacy campaign urging the federal government to approve 5,000 t visas, the statutory annual cap for t visas. Htlc conducted appellate advocacy for trafficking survivors, filing an amicus brief in the d.c. Circuit court of appeals on behalf of workers held in forced labor. The organization advocated for an end to forced labor in global supply chains, leading the coalition against forced labour in trade and the tariff act advocates group. These coalitions pressed for robust enforcement of import bans to block goods tainted by forced labor from entering markets around the globe. Htlc worked with partner organizations to file petitions and advocate for enforcement under section 307 of the tariff act. Htlc also led efforts to mark the 25th anniversary of the trafficking victims protection act and the palermo protocol, holding one advocacy event at oxford university and providing leadership for a conference in Washington, d.c.trafficking survivor leadership program: in 2025, htlc continued to administer the harriet tubman fellowship program to support labor trafficking survivors leading in their communities. The harriet tubman fellows, seven remarkable leaders selected from a competitive field of eighty-four candidates, each received a two-year scholarship to pursue educational opportunities. In 2025, the harriet tubman fellows returned to Washington, d.c. For a week of advocacy training and meetings with congressional staff members. Htlc included survivor-leaders at all levels of the organization: on the staff, on the organization's leadership team, on the board of directors, as consultants, and on the advisory board.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 72.5%; rating input score 73
• Program expense ratio: 63.6%; rating input score 64
• Fundraising efficiency: $9.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: Limited
• Foreign activity oversight: Limited
• Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
• Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
• Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

• Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 27th percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Pass
  • Document-retention policy: Pass
  • CEO compensation review process: Fail
  • 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: -12.2%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.03; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 17.7%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings