Alliance to End Human Trafficking
Legal name: Us Catholic Sisters Against Human Trafficking
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 810801552
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2015
- Location
- Chicago, IL, USA
- Phone
- 267-332-7768
- Rating
- 89
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $862,202
- Expenses
- $938,060
- Assets
- $3,090,932
- Liabilities
- $147,863
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
20 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SALLY DUFFY SC (PRESIDENT)
- JUDY MOLOSKY CSJ (VICE PRESIDENT)
- KATIE BOLLER GOSEWISCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- KATIE BOLLER GOSEWISCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $103,841 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Alliance to End Human Trafficking sheds light on this hidden crime through education—empowering people to recognize grooming and take action. From conferences and webinars to presentations and podcasts, we equip communities with the knowledge to identify trafficking and protect themselves and others.
What it reported doing in 2024
Survivor services: in 2024, the alliance to end human trafficking supported seven houses for survivors of human trafficking and numerous individual survivors by providing over $200,000 in grant and scholarship funding. Further, we provided training to the houses for survivors in grant writing and development assist in creating more sustainable organizations. The alliance to end human trafficking is a survivor informed organization, with a survivor advisory council offering opportunities for survivor leaders throughout the country.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 84
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 82.7%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $16.95 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th 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; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: -8.8%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.3; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 42.3% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 38.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 91% of revenue deployed · 82.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $775K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 20 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 7 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.