21st Century Christian Social Movements: Frames, Repertoires & Contexts

1. Introduction
2. Section I: Theoretical Foundations of Social Movement Analysis
   1. The Triad of Mobilization: A Sociological Toolkit
   2. The Principle of Alignment: Forging Resonance
3. Section II: Case Study Analysis: Aligning Faith, Frames, and Action
   1. Case Study 1: The Anti-Trafficking Movement – Reframing Sin as Crime
   2. Case Study 2: The Clean Water Movement – Reframing Charity as Transparent Impact
   3. Case Study 3: The Low-Fee Private School Movement – Reframing Education as Christian Enterprise
   4. Case Study 4: The Microlending Movement – Reframing Poverty Alleviation as Stewardship
   5. Case Study 5: Pentecostal Addiction Recovery Movement – Reframing Recovery as Spiritual Transformation
4. Section III: Comparative Analysis and Synthesis
   1. Comparative Framework of Christian Social Movements
   2. Patterns of Alignment and Innovation
5. Section IV: Principles for Building Future Christian Social Movements
   1. 1. Principle of Frame Resonance: Master the Art of the Bridge
   2. 2. Principle of Repertoire Innovation: Match the Toolkit to the Task and the Times
   3. 3. Principle of Contextual Intelligence: Navigate the Narrative Battlefield
   4. 4. Principle of Transformational Motivation: Frame Adherence as Agency
   5. 5. Principle of Evidenced Impact: Build Legitimacy Through Proof
6. Conclusion
   1. Works cited

Introduction

Contemporary Christian social movements represent a significant evolution in the landscape of faith-based activism. Historically, Christian social engagement in many Western contexts was often characterized by localized charitable works, domestic moral crusades focused on issues like temperance, and missionary efforts aimed at spiritual conversion. While these forms of engagement persist, the late 20th and early 21st centuries have witnessed the rise of a new archetype: sophisticated, globally-oriented, and professionally managed social movement organizations (SMOs) that tackle complex, systemic issues such as human trafficking, global poverty, and access to fundamental resources like clean water and education. This evolution mirrors a broader transformation in the nature of collective action and contentious politics, a shift from localized, state-focused contention to transnational, multi-faceted campaigns that leverage global networks, media, and markets.1 These modern movements are not simply extensions of church ministry; they are complex social and political actors operating on a global stage.

The efficacy and strategic direction of these contemporary Christian movements are not solely the product of religious fervor or moral conviction. Rather, their success, sustainability, and character are contingent upon a dynamic and often deliberate alignment of three core sociological elements. This paper argues that the impact of these movements is best understood through an analytical framework that examines the interplay of (1) the construction of resonant collective action frames that skillfully bridge theological imperatives with secular norms and values; (2) the deployment of innovative and contextually appropriate repertoires of contention that extend beyond traditional protest to include market-based and digitally-native strategies; and (3) a sophisticated navigation of the prevailing socio-political context, including the political opportunity structure, dominant cultural narratives, and critical academic and policy discourses. By analyzing these interconnected dynamics, one can discern the underlying architecture of modern faith-based social change.

To explore this thesis, this paper will employ an analytical framework drawn from foundational and contemporary work in the sociology of social movements, particularly the contributions of Erving Goffman, Charles Tilly, Sidney Tarrow, and David Snow.3 The analysis will proceed in four parts. Section I will establish the theoretical foundations, defining and elaborating on the core concepts of collective action frames, repertoires of contention, political opportunity structures, and the crucial process of frame alignment. Section II will apply this theoretical toolkit to four distinct case studies of prominent Christian social movements: the anti-sex trafficking movement, exemplified by International Justice Mission (IJM) and the Tim Tebow Foundation (TTF); the clean water movement, represented by Charity: water; the movement to support low-fee private schools, represented by Edify; and the microlending movement, as practiced by Opportunity International. Section III will provide a comparative analysis and synthesis of these cases, identifying common patterns and divergent strategies. Finally, Section IV will distill these findings into a set of prescriptive principles designed to inform the work of future architects of Christian social movements, offering a guide for building effective and sustainable campaigns for social change in the 21st century.

Section I: Theoretical Foundations of Social Movement Analysis

To analyze the complex dynamics of contemporary social movements, a robust theoretical toolkit is required. The sociology of social movements offers a powerful triad of concepts—collective action frames, repertoires of contention, and political context—that, when considered in concert, provide a comprehensive framework for understanding how movements emerge, mobilize adherents, and pursue their goals. This section will define these core concepts and introduce the vital principle of alignment that links them together.

The Triad of Mobilization: A Sociological Toolkit

The formation and trajectory of any social movement can be understood as an interplay between meaning, action, and environment. These three dimensions are captured by the concepts of frames, repertoires, and context.

Collective Action Frames

At its core, a social movement is an exercise in meaning-making. Grievances and social problems do not automatically translate into collective action; they must first be interpreted, defined, and imbued with significance in a way that compels people to act.3 Social movement framing theory, drawing from the work of Erving Goffman, examines this process of constructing and disseminating interpretive schemata.3 Goffman argued that people use “frames” to organize and make sense of the world, much like a picture frame focuses attention on certain elements while excluding others.3 Social movements strategically create and deploy “collective action frames”—action-oriented sets of beliefs and meanings—to articulate a problem, identify a solution, and motivate participation.8 According to David Snow and Robert Benford, two of the leading theorists in this area, this framing process involves three essential tasks.3

• Diagnostic Framing: This is the foundational task of identifying a problem and assigning blame or causality. It answers the questions, “What is the issue?” and “Who or what is responsible?”.3 A successful diagnostic frame transforms a diffuse sense of discontent into a clearly defined injustice. For a movement to mobilize, a problem must be perceived as such.3 Many powerful diagnostic frames are “injustice frames,” which not only identify a problem but also name victims and perpetrators, thereby generating moral indignation that can fuel action.3
• Prognostic Framing: Once a problem has been diagnosed, the movement must propose a solution and outline a plan of attack. This is the task of prognostic framing, which answers the question, “What is to be done?”.3 Prognostic frames articulate the movement’s goals and the strategies and tactics that will be used to achieve them. There is typically a strong consistency between a movement’s diagnosis of a problem and its proposed solution, with the range of solutions often constrained by the movement’s core ideology and established practices.3
• Motivational Framing: Finally, a movement must provide a “call to arms”—a compelling rationale for individuals to join the cause and take action. Motivational framing answers the question, “Why should I get involved?”.3 This involves creating a sense of urgency (the problem must be addressed now), efficacy (our actions can make a difference), propriety (it is our duty to act), and severity (the problem is serious enough to warrant action).3 These frames are crucial for overcoming the inertia and collective action problems that can hinder mobilization.

Repertoires of Contention

Social movements do not invent their methods of action from scratch. They draw from a historically and culturally specific menu of known actions, a concept the historian Charles Tilly termed the “repertoire of contention”.3 A repertoire is the set of tools and tactics available to and understood by a group of people at a given time, including everything from creating associations and holding public meetings to petition drives, demonstrations, boycotts, and strikes.13

These repertoires are both enabling and constraining. They are enabling because they provide familiar and tested forms of action that do not have to be reinvented for each new campaign. They are constraining because people tend to stick with what they know, making radical innovation in tactics uncommon.13 However, repertoires are not static; they evolve over time in response to changes in technology, economic structures, and political systems. For example, pre-modern repertoires included actions like food riots and banditry.13 The rise of the modern nation-state and industrial capitalism in the 19th century saw the emergence of the repertoire we are familiar with today: mass demonstrations, strikes, and petitioning.13 More recently, the digital age has given rise to a new “digital repertoire” that includes online petitions, social media campaigns, and hacktivism.13 This historical evolution demonstrates that the available forms of collective action are deeply embedded in their societal context.

Political and Social Context (The Opportunity Structure)

The third crucial element is the external environment in which a movement operates. Political Process Theory (PPT), also known as Political Opportunity Theory, argues that the emergence and success of social movements are profoundly shaped by the structure of political opportunities.15 A movement’s own resources and frames are often not enough; there must be an opening or vulnerability in the existing political system for the movement to exploit.17

The “political opportunity structure” refers to the consistent dimensions of the political environment that encourage or discourage collective action.7 Key components of this structure include 15:

• The openness or closure of the political system: The degree to which the system allows for participation and dissent.
• The stability of elite alignments: Divisions among political, economic, or cultural elites can create powerful allies for a movement or weaken opposition.
• The presence of elite allies: Influential figures within the establishment who can provide a movement with resources, legitimacy, and access.
• The state’s capacity and propensity for repression: A decline in the state’s willingness or ability to repress dissent creates a significant opportunity for mobilization.

Beyond the formal political system, the broader social and cultural context is also critical. Shifts in public opinion, major economic changes, or crises of legitimacy can all create opportunities for movements to advance their claims.17 Therefore, successful movements are not just adept at framing and acting; they are also astute readers of their environment, capable of recognizing and seizing opportune moments for change.

The Principle of Alignment: Forging Resonance

The three elements of the mobilization triad—frames, repertoires, and context—are not independent variables. Their power lies in their alignment. A movement’s chosen frame must resonate with the cultural context and the lived experiences of its target audience. Its chosen repertoire must be appropriate for its goals and the political opportunities available. This crucial linking process is conceptualized as frame alignment.6

Frame alignment refers to the “linkage of individual and SMO interpretive orientations, such that some set of individual interests, values and beliefs and SMO activities, goals, and ideology are congruent and complementary”.6 It is the process by which a movement connects its way of seeing the world with that of potential supporters, making participation seem logical, appealing, and necessary. Snow et al. identify four primary alignment processes 6:

• Frame Bridging: This involves linking two or more ideologically similar but previously unconnected frames. For example, a movement might reach out to an “unmobilized sentiment pool”—a group of people who share its grievances but are not yet organized—and show them how the movement’s goals align with their existing beliefs.6
• Frame Amplification: This is the process of clarifying and invigorating a value or belief that is already held by potential supporters but may be dormant or not yet connected to the issue at hand. It involves idealizing and elevating certain values (value amplification) or clarifying beliefs about the seriousness of a problem or the efficacy of action (belief amplification).6
• Frame Extension: A movement extends its primary frame to incorporate issues or concerns that are important to potential adherents, even if those concerns are not central to the movement’s core mission. This is a pragmatic strategy to broaden the movement’s base of support by showing that it cares about a wider range of issues.6
• Frame Transformation: This is the most profound alignment process, required when a movement’s goals and values are fundamentally at odds with existing cultural norms. It involves creating entirely new meanings, values, and ways of seeing the world. This can range from reframing a personal tragedy as a public injustice to a full-blown conversion that changes a person’s entire worldview.6

The classical view of framing often portrays it as a deliberate, top-down process where movement leaders strategically craft and deploy messages to resonate with target audiences.10 This perspective emphasizes the agency of social movement organizations in “meaning deployment.” However, this view can be seen as overly voluntarist, neglecting the dynamic and contested nature of meaning-making.10 More recent scholarship highlights that frames are often not simply “pulled down” from a repertoire and deployed, but are “built-up” and instantiated through ongoing interaction between the movement, its targets, its constituents, and its opponents.10 Movements like the Arab Spring or the Gilets Jaunes in France saw their frames emerge and escalate in unpredictable ways through the very process of contention.10 This suggests a more dialectical relationship: the interaction between a movement and its context forces a recursive process of frame construction. Movement leaders must therefore be not only strategic architects of meaning but also skilled improvisers, capable of adapting their frames within a fluid and contested “discursive opportunity structure”.12

Furthermore, while Tilly’s foundational concept of “repertoires of contention” was rooted in the historical analysis of political claim-making against the state—such as protests, strikes, and demonstrations 1—the contemporary landscape has seen a significant expansion of what constitutes a social movement repertoire. The rise of neoliberal economic ideologies and the ubiquity of digital technology have created new contexts and opportunities that favor different modes of action. The case studies examined in this paper will show a marked shift from repertoires of contention to repertoires of construction and persuasion. Organizations that deliver market-based solutions like microlending or support for private schools engage in repertoires of capital investment and service delivery. These are not “contentious” in the traditional sense of challenging state power through protest, but they are undeniably forms of collective action aimed at systemic social change. Similarly, movements that rely on sophisticated digital marketing and brand-building are using repertoires of persuasion to mobilize resources and shift public consciousness. This evolution demonstrates how the prevailing context directly shapes and expands the available repertoires, suggesting that the very definition of a “social movement” must be flexible enough to encompass these non-confrontational, constructive, and market-oriented forms of collective action.

Section II: Case Study Analysis: Aligning Faith, Frames, and Action

This section applies the theoretical framework of frames, repertoires, and context to four distinct contemporary Christian social movements. Each case study will deconstruct the movement’s approach to meaning-making, its choice of actions, and its navigation of the surrounding environment, revealing the intricate architecture of its mobilization strategy.

Case Study 1: The Anti-Trafficking Movement – Reframing Sin as Crime

The modern Christian anti-trafficking movement is one of the most visible and well-funded social causes in the evangelical world. Led by prominent organizations like International Justice Mission (IJM) and the Tim Tebow Foundation (TTF), it has successfully mobilized a vast constituency and achieved significant political influence. Its success is a powerful illustration of strategic frame transformation and the leveraging of a favorable political context.

Frame Analysis

The movement’s core framing strategy involves a radical redefinition of commercial sex.

• Diagnostic Frame: The central achievement of this movement is a powerful frame transformation.6 It has successfully shifted the dominant public understanding of commercial sex involving vulnerable individuals away from a paradigm of moral failing (the “sin” of “prostitution”) and toward a paradigm of violent crime and egregious human rights abuse (“sex trafficking” or “modern-day slavery”).21 This diagnostic frame identifies clear villains (traffickers, pimps, buyers) and innocent victims (often children and vulnerable women). This reframing is then amplified through theological language that resonates deeply with its Christian base. Victims are described as “image bearers of God” 25, and trafficking is framed as an assault on God-given dignity, creating a powerful moral obligation for Christians to intervene.26
• Prognostic Frame: While united in their diagnosis, the leading organizations in this space exhibit a notable divergence in their primary prognostic frames. IJM’s proposed solution is systemic and institutional: justice system transformation.21 Their theory of change posits that the most effective long-term solution is to increase the accountability of perpetrators by partnering with and strengthening local law enforcement, prosecution, and judicial systems. The goal is to create a powerful deterrent effect that fundamentally alters the criminal calculus.21 In contrast, the Tim Tebow Foundation’s prognostic frame is more focused on direct intervention. Their stated solutions center on the tangible and immediate goals of enabling the rescue of victims, providing restorative survivor care through safe homes, and engaging in prevention efforts at the community level.25
• Motivational Frame: Both organizations deploy exceptionally strong motivational frames to mobilize support. IJM uses empowering language, inviting donors to “be the reason for rescue” and to become “Freedom Partners,” which frames financial support as an act of direct participation in a global fight for justice.31 TTF leverages the significant public platform of its founder, framing its mission as an urgent call “to bring Faith, Hope and Love to those needing a brighter day in their darkest hour of need”.37 Its “Join the Rescue Team” campaign creates a compelling, action-oriented identity for supporters, blending faith-based compassion with a sense of being on the front lines of a critical battle.36

Repertoire & Context

The movement’s actions and its environment are as crucial to its success as its framing.

• Repertoire: The repertoire of the anti-trafficking movement is diverse and professionalized. IJM’s toolkit is that of a global legal and development organization. It includes direct legal intervention in criminal cases, hands-on training and mentoring for police and prosecutors, and the production of sophisticated, data-driven prevalence studies to measure the problem and track progress.21 TTF’s repertoire, while also focused on direct action through funding partner-led rescue operations and establishing safe homes, has increasingly incorporated high-profile political advocacy. A prime example is its championing of the “Renewed Hope Act” in the U.S. Congress, a legislative initiative aimed at increasing federal resources for victim identification.37 This demonstrates a move toward a repertoire that combines direct service with direct political contention.
• Context: The movement has capitalized on a uniquely favorable political opportunity structure. It successfully built a broad, bipartisan coalition that unites conservative evangelical Christians, certain strains of radical feminism, and secular human rights advocates, all of whom, for different reasons, view the commercial sex industry as inherently exploitative.23 This wide-ranging consensus has made anti-trafficking a “crime everyone loves to hate,” creating significant political will for legislative action and funding.26 However, this context is also marked by a growing and significant critical discourse. A number of scholars and advocates critique the movement’s dominant “modern-day slavery” frame. They argue that this frame is legally imprecise, conflating distinct phenomena like trafficking, forced labor, and slavery, which can undermine legal efforts by raising the evidentiary bar for what constitutes a crime.43 More fundamentally, critics contend that this frame serves as a “discourse of depoliticization”.43 By focusing narrowly on the actions of individual “evil traffickers,” the frame obscures the deeper, structural causes of exploitation—such as poverty, restrictive migration policies, weak labor protections, and systemic discrimination—that create the conditions of vulnerability in the first place.46

The “modern-day slavery” frame is a masterful example of both frame amplification and frame extension. It powerfully amplifies the moral horror of the issue by explicitly linking it to the historical atrocity of chattel slavery, an analogy that resonates deeply given the historical role of Christian activists in the 19th-century abolitionist movement.28 Simultaneously, it extends the frame’s appeal beyond a purely religious constituency to a secular audience concerned with universal human rights. The frame’s very power, however, derives from an ambiguity that is also its most significant liability. The term “slavery” triggers an immediate and unequivocal moral condemnation, making it an exceptionally effective tool for fundraising and political mobilization.43 Yet, this powerful diagnostic frame, which simplifies a complex social problem into a narrative of good versus evil, naturally leads to a narrow prognostic focus on rescue and prosecution. This approach, while viscerally appealing, risks diverting attention and resources away from addressing the complex socio-economic and political structures—the broader context—that systematically produce vulnerability to trafficking. This reveals a critical dynamic for social movements: a movement’s most potent and resonant frame can, paradoxically, limit its capacity for deep, systemic impact by obscuring the full, politicized scope of the problem it seeks to solve.

Case Study 2: The Clean Water Movement – Reframing Charity as Transparent Impact

Charity: water has become one of the most recognizable and successful non-profits of the digital age. Its rapid growth and influence are not accidental but are the result of a masterfully executed strategy that perfectly aligns its framing and repertoire with the cultural context of a new generation of philanthropists.

Frame Analysis

Charity: water’s framing is innovative because it diagnoses and offers a solution not just to a humanitarian crisis, but also to a crisis within the non-profit sector itself.

• Diagnostic Frame: The organization’s messaging implicitly diagnoses two distinct problems. The first is the explicit and urgent global water crisis, which deprives millions of access to a basic human necessity. The second, more subtle diagnosis is a crisis of donor trust in the charitable sector. The unspoken premise is that traditional non-profits are often perceived as opaque, inefficient, and untrustworthy with donor funds.
• Prognostic Frame: The solution to this dual problem is presented with striking clarity and simplicity: the “100% Model”.47 This model serves as the organization’s core prognostic frame. By creating a separate funding stream—a group of private donors and foundations called “The Well”—to cover all operational and administrative costs, Charity: water can guarantee that 100% of public donations go directly to funding water projects in the field.47 This is a direct and powerful answer to the problem of donor skepticism about overhead costs.
• Motivational Frame: The motivational framing of Charity: water represents a significant departure from traditional non-profit appeals. Instead of relying on images of suffering to evoke guilt, the organization employs a consistently positive, hopeful, and empowering narrative. Its marketing materials are characterized by beautiful, high-quality, almost cinematic photography and video that celebrate the joy and transformation that clean water brings.49 The donor is explicitly framed as the hero of this story. Language like, “With the help of over a million supporters like you, we’re on a mission to end the water crisis in our lifetime,” positions the act of giving not as a duty but as an empowering act of joining a vibrant, successful community to achieve a tangible goal.49

Repertoire & Context

Charity: water’s repertoire is a case study in 21st-century movement building, one that is perfectly tailored to its socio-technical context.

• Repertoire: The organization’s repertoire is almost exclusively digital and marketing-centric. Its primary tools are not protests or petitions but sophisticated, multi-platform social media campaigns, viral fundraising initiatives like the “Birthday Project” (where individuals pledge their birthday to raise funds), and a robust peer-to-peer fundraising platform that allows supporters to launch their own campaigns.48 A key part of their repertoire is the performance of transparency itself. They provide donors with GPS coordinates and photos of the specific water projects their money has funded, creating a direct and tangible link between giving and impact.49
• Context: The success of this model is inextricably linked to the cultural and technological context of its primary target audience: Millennial and Gen Z donors. This demographic is digitally native, having grown up in a highly interconnected world. Research on their philanthropic preferences shows they value authenticity, transparency, and measurable impact above all else.52 They are more likely to discover and engage with causes through social media and peer networks than through traditional channels.51 Furthermore, they are often more interested in being hands-on and feeling a direct connection to the causes they support.53 The concurrent rise of user-friendly and powerful digital fundraising platforms has provided the essential technological infrastructure that makes Charity: water’s repertoire possible.59

The Charity: water model demonstrates a fundamental fusion of social movement mobilization with the principles of modern branding and marketing. Its strategy is predicated on treating potential supporters not as constituents to be mobilized for political action, but as discerning consumers who must be convinced of a product’s unique value proposition. In this case, the “product” is the experience of transparent, impactful, and emotionally rewarding giving. Where traditional movement theory focuses on mobilizing people for contentious action against a target 17, Charity: water operates like a premier consumer brand, explicitly aspiring to be “the Nike or Apple of charity”.50 Its diagnostic frame identifies a clear “pain point” for its target “customer”—the widespread distrust of non-profit overhead. Its prognostic frame offers a compelling unique selling proposition—the “100% Model”—that directly addresses this pain point. Its motivational frame uses aspirational storytelling and high-quality design to build brand loyalty and community. This approach, which treats mobilization as a form of marketing, is perfectly suited to a socio-cultural context where younger generations are often more inclined to “consume” social good through trusted, well-marketed brands than to join traditional activist organizations. This strategy is not without its critics, however. Some argue that the “100% Model” is effectively “smoke and mirrors,” as money is fungible, and that it perpetuates the harmful myth that overhead costs are inherently bad, thereby setting an unrealistic and damaging standard for the rest of the non-profit sector.65

Case Study 3: The Low-Fee Private School Movement – Reframing Education as Christian Enterprise

Operating in a very different context from the high-visibility campaigns against trafficking or for clean water, the movement to support low-fee private schools, exemplified by the organization Edify, represents a quieter but equally strategic form of social intervention. Its approach is characterized by a market-based repertoire and a frame that carefully navigates a highly contentious policy landscape.

Frame Analysis

Edify’s framing presents a business-oriented solution to a public service failure, rooted in a theological vision of national transformation.

• Diagnostic Frame: The problem, as framed by Edify, is a dual failure in many developing nations. First, there is the failure of overburdened and under-resourced public education systems to provide accessible, high-quality schooling for all children.66 Second, there is a market failure: local entrepreneurs who are willing and able to start schools to fill this gap lack access to the necessary capital and business training to succeed and scale their efforts.66 The problem is thus framed as one of both educational deficit and entrepreneurial constraint.
• Prognostic Frame: The proposed solution is a model of sustainable, market-based empowerment. Edify’s prognostic frame is not about charity or aid in the traditional sense, but about investment and partnership. They provide a “toolkit” for local school proprietors—whom they term “edupreneurs”—consisting of three key resources: loan capital for infrastructure expansion, training in effective school management and business practices, and access to educational technology to improve learning outcomes.67 This is explicitly a “hand up” model designed to foster self-sufficiency and long-term sustainability for these Christ-centered schools.
• Motivational Frame: The ultimate motivation driving the movement is theological and deeply aspirational. The stated vision is the creation of “Flourishing Godly Nations”.69 The core belief is that by improving and expanding Christ-centered education, the movement can be a catalyst for the transformation of not just individual students, but their families, their communities, and ultimately their entire nations.67 This grand vision is grounded in a set of core values drawn directly from Christian scripture, such as “Christ-like Service” (Philippians 2:3) and “Applaud the Entrepreneurial Spirit” (Matthew 25:28), which serve to align the organization’s market-based methods with its theological mission.70

Repertoire & Context

Edify’s choice of actions and its positioning within the global education debate are central to its strategy.

• Repertoire: The movement’s repertoire is explicitly non-confrontational and enterprise-focused. It does not engage in protests, lobbying, or public shaming of governments. Instead, its toolkit consists of financial services (lending), capacity building (business and teacher training), and technology transfer.68 This is a repertoire of construction and investment, operating in parallel to, rather than in direct contention with, state systems.
• Context: Edify operates within the highly contested and politically charged global policy context of the role of non-state actors in education. There is a vigorous and often polarized international debate regarding the rise of low-fee private schools (LFPS) in the Global South.72 Proponents, including some development agencies and researchers, argue that LFPS offer a vital alternative where public systems are failing, providing greater choice, accountability, and sometimes better learning outcomes for the poor.75 Critics, including many human rights organizations and teachers’ unions, argue that the proliferation of LFPS exacerbates social inequality by creating a two-tiered system based on ability to pay, drains vital resources and political support from public education, and often fails to reach the most marginalized, such as girls and children with disabilities.77 Edify’s model is a direct intervention into this complex and controversial market for education.

The success of Edify in mobilizing significant resources for its mission depends heavily on a strategy of strategic de-contention and frame insulation. The organization’s framing of its work allows it to remain insulated from the most contentious political debates surrounding the privatization of education. The global discourse on non-state actors in education is a fierce ideological battleground, pitting advocates of public education as a human right against proponents of market-based solutions.72 For an organization like Edify, engaging directly in this debate would mean choosing a side, which could risk alienating key constituencies, from philanthropic donors to partner organizations to host-country governments. Instead, the organization’s framing skillfully sidesteps this political minefield. By focusing its diagnostic frame on “failing schools” and its prognostic frame on “empowering local entrepreneurs,” it avoids the politically loaded language of “privatization.” This is a subtle but powerful act of semantic substitution: the “low-fee private school proprietor” is reframed as a heroic “edupreneur.” This allows the movement to build a broad coalition of support around a set of widely shared and depoliticized values—Christian faith, entrepreneurship, sustainability, and helping children—without becoming entangled in the constraints and conflicts of the broader political opportunity structure. This demonstrates that for movements operating within highly polarized contexts, a key survival strategy can be the adoption of repertoires and frames that are intentionally non-confrontational and ideologically insulated from the central conflict.

Case Study 4: The Microlending Movement – Reframing Poverty Alleviation as Stewardship

The Christian microlending movement, with organizations like Opportunity International (OI) at its forefront, has been a dominant force in international development for decades. It pioneered a model that sought to replace traditional charity with market-based empowerment, a frame that has had enormous appeal. However, the movement also provides a compelling case study of how a changing evidence context can challenge a movement’s core narrative.

Frame Analysis

The movement’s framing is built on a powerful narrative of empowerment, sustainability, and faith-driven stewardship.

• Diagnostic Frame: Opportunity International frames the root cause of poverty not as a simple lack of material resources, but as a lack of opportunity and exclusion from the formal financial system.80 The poor are not depicted as helpless victims needing handouts, but as resilient, hardworking, and entrepreneurial individuals who are trapped by systemic barriers that prevent them from unleashing their potential.82
• Prognostic Frame: The solution, therefore, is not charity but empowerment through financial inclusion. The movement’s prognostic frame is famously summarized as offering a “hand up, not a handout”.82 The core tools for this empowerment are micro-financial products: small loans (microcredit) to start or expand a business, savings accounts to build resilience, and insurance to mitigate risk, all coupled with financial literacy training.80 This is framed as a uniquely sustainable model. Because the loans are repaid (OI reports a 98% repayment rate), the capital can be recycled to help another entrepreneur, multiplying the impact of every philanthropic dollar donated.82
• Motivational Frame: The movement’s motivation is explicitly grounded in Christian faith. OI’s mission states, “We respond to Jesus Christ’s call to love and serve the poor,” specifically seeking to emulate the parable of the Good Samaritan.85 This theological imperative is expressed through a set of core values that include biblical stewardship, humility, respect, and transformation.85 Crucially, this religious frame is skillfully extended to align with widely held secular values of economic empowerment, market-based sustainability, and individual entrepreneurialism. This
  frame extension allows OI to build a broad coalition of support that includes not only faith-based donors but also secular foundations, corporations, and government development agencies.82

Repertoire & Context

OI’s repertoire involves the delivery of financial products, but its context has been shaped by a dramatic shift in the academic understanding of its impact.

• Repertoire: The primary repertoire of OI is the design and delivery of a suite of financial and training services to clients in the developing world. This includes the well-known model of group lending through “Trust Groups,” where members cross-guarantee each other’s loans, as well as individual loans, savings programs, and insurance products.80 Increasingly, this repertoire has incorporated technology, using mobile banking and agent networks to reach remote and rural clients.80 A significant part of their repertoire also involves extensive monitoring, evaluation, and the production of annual reports to demonstrate impact and maintain donor trust.84
• Context: The microlending movement has experienced a profound contextual shift over the past two decades. It was initially heralded by many as a revolutionary tool for ending global poverty, a perception solidified when its pioneer, Muhammad Yunus, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2006.93 This created an exceptionally favorable context for fundraising and expansion. However, beginning in the 2010s, this celebratory narrative was challenged by a new and more critical academic and policy context. A wave of rigorous impact evaluations, particularly randomized controlled trials (RCTs), began to produce more sober results. These studies, conducted across numerous countries, consistently found that while microcredit could be beneficial for consumption smoothing and providing households with more financial flexibility, it did not, on average, lead to the transformative increases in income, consumption, or business profits that had been widely claimed.94

The microlending movement offers a powerful illustration of the challenges that arise from a frame-evidence misalignment. The movement’s initial prognostic frame—that a small loan can reliably lift a family out of poverty—was incredibly resonant due to its simplicity and its elegant alignment with both Christian values of stewardship and capitalist ideals of self-reliance. It was a compelling story that was easy to communicate and that inspired millions to give. The emergence of a large body of rigorous, quantitative evidence from RCTs, however, created a new “evidence context” that directly challenged the universal and transformative claims of this simple frame.95 The data revealed a much more complex and nuanced reality: the impact of microcredit is highly conditional, proving more effective for entrepreneurs who already have some business experience and less so for those starting from scratch, and often having no significant effect on average household income or women’s empowerment.95 This created a significant causal pressure on organizations like Opportunity International. They faced a choice: either ignore the evolving evidence and risk losing credibility with institutional funders and a more discerning public, or adapt both their frames and their programs to reflect this more complex reality. OI’s strategic evolution—its increasing diversification away from a single focus on microcredit and toward more specialized and targeted programs like Agriculture Finance (AgFinance) and Education Finance (EduFinance), and its focus on serving specific populations like women and farmers 99—can be understood as a direct and necessary response to this frame-evidence misalignment. This case demonstrates a critical lesson for modern social movements: in an era of evidence-based policy and data-driven philanthropy, movements must develop the institutional capacity to absorb, interpret, and strategically adapt to complex external evidence, even when that evidence complicates their core mobilizing narrative.

Case Study 5: Pentecostal Addiction Recovery Movement – Reframing Recovery as Spiritual Transformation

The global Pentecostal movement, one of the fastest-growing segments of Christianity, has historically been characterized by a focus on evangelism and spiritual experience, often leading to accusations of an “otherworldly” spirituality that avoids engagement with social and political issues.100 However, a significant shift has occurred, with many Pentecostal groups developing robust social ministries that integrate social concern with their evangelistic mission.102 This evolution is powerfully exemplified by organizations like Adult & Teen Challenge (ATC), a global network of addiction recovery centers, and the Dream Center Network, a model for urban outreach and residential support. These movements showcase a distinct approach to social change, rooted in a theology of holistic, Spirit-led transformation.

Frame Analysis

The framing employed by these Pentecostal movements is unapologetically theological, defining both social problems and their solutions in explicitly spiritual terms.

• Diagnostic Frame: The core diagnosis is that “life-controlling issues” such as drug addiction, alcoholism, homelessness, and poverty are ultimately symptoms of a deeper spiritual problem: a broken relationship with God.103 Addiction is framed as an attempt “to fulfill a void that only God can fill”.103 This diagnostic frame deliberately contrasts with secular models, which are seen as insufficient because they fail to address the foundational spiritual needs of the individual.105 The problem is not merely psychological or social, but spiritual bondage.
• Prognostic Frame: If the problem is spiritual, the solution must be as well. The prognostic frame is one of radical, Christ-centered “transformation,” a term explicitly favored over “treatment” or “rehabilitation”.105 The solution is a “restored relationship with God, through Jesus Christ,” which empowers an individual to become a “new creation”.103 This transformation is holistic, aiming to make individuals “mentally sound, emotionally balanced, socially adjusted, physically well, and spiritually alive”.103 The Dream Center broadens this prognostic frame with the simple, powerful mission to “find a need and fill it,” reconnecting isolated people to God and a supportive community through a wide array of practical human services.108
• Motivational Frame: The motivational frame is deeply personal and transformational. For participants, it offers the hope of a completely new identity—no longer an “addict” or “nagging wife,” but a “child of the Most High God”.106 It is a “second chance” at life, made possible through the power of Christ.103 For staff, volunteers, and donors, the motivation is to participate directly in God’s redemptive work, witnessing and facilitating these profound life transformations.108 The transformed themselves are expected to become transformers, creating a virtuous cycle of leadership development from within the community of the redeemed.111

Repertoire & Context

The actions of these movements are centered on creating immersive, alternative communities, a strategy that places them in a unique and often contested relationship with the secular state.

• Repertoire: The primary repertoire is the creation of long-term, highly structured, and immersive residential programs.104 ATC’s network of over 200 centers typically requires a 12-18 month commitment, isolating residents from outside influences (no mobile phones, screened mail) to focus on a disciplined daily regimen of Bible study, prayer, work therapy, and discipleship using a standardized curriculum.104 The Dream Center employs a similar residential model for recovery but combines it with a much broader repertoire of community-based social services, including massive food and clothing distribution, transitional housing for diverse groups like veterans and former foster youth, and human trafficking rescue programs.114 A key part of the Dream Center’s repertoire is its function as a training and mobilization hub, inspiring thousands of volunteers and leaders to replicate its model, which has led to a global network of over 84 independent Dream Centers.109
• Context: These movements are deeply embedded in the theological context of global Pentecostalism, which emphasizes a direct, experiential faith and the power of the Holy Spirit to enact miraculous change.118 This provides the theological rationale for their belief in supernatural transformation. However, this positions them within a contentious political and regulatory context. The rejection of secular therapeutic models at some ATC sites and their reliance on non-licensed staff has led to conflict with state regulatory agencies.119 

Section III: Comparative Analysis and Synthesis

The individual case studies reveal distinct strategies for aligning frames, repertoires, and contexts. A comparative analysis allows for the identification of overarching patterns, common threads, and key points of divergence among these contemporary Christian social movements. This synthesis provides a richer understanding of the strategic choices available to faith-based organizations seeking to effect social change.

Comparative Framework of Christian Social Movements

To facilitate a clear comparison, the core findings from the four case studies are summarized in the table below. This framework distills each movement’s strategy into its essential components, allowing for a side-by-side examination of their approaches to problem definition, solution proposal, mobilization, action, and environmental navigation. This structured comparison is essential for moving from individual analysis to the identification of broader patterns and principles. It highlights both the shared theological grounding of these movements and the remarkable diversity of their strategic application of social movement theory.

Movement	Diagnostic Frame (Problem)	Prognostic Frame (Solution)	Motivational Frame (Call to Action)	Primary Repertoire (Toolkit)	Key Contextual Factors
Anti-Trafficking (IJM/TTF)	Human trafficking is modern-day slavery; a violent crime against God-given dignity.	Systemic justice reform (IJM); Direct rescue & care (TTF).	Moral outrage; Biblical call to “rescue the oppressed”; protect the vulnerable.	Legal intervention, policy advocacy, celebrity awareness campaigns, direct action.	Broad political consensus; critical academic discourse on the “slavery” frame.
Clean Water (Charity: water)	Lack of clean water AND a crisis of donor trust in the non-profit sector.	The “100% Model” guaranteeing transparency and direct impact.	Empowerment of the donor as a hero; positive, aspirational storytelling.	Digital marketing, social media, peer-to-peer fundraising, high-quality branding.	Rise of Millennial/Gen Z philanthropy; demand for transparency & impact.
Low-Fee Schools (Edify)	Failing public education systems in the Global South.	Market-based empowerment of local Christian “edupreneurs” via loans & training.	Vision of “Flourishing Godly Nations” through Christ-centered education.	Capital investment, business training, technology transfer (non-confrontational).	Contested policy debate on non-state actors and privatization in education.
Microlending (Opp. Int’l)	Poverty is a lack of opportunity, not a lack of potential.	Sustainable empowerment via financial tools; a “hand up, not a handout.”	Biblical stewardship; empathy for the entrepreneurial poor; transformation.	Financial service delivery, Trust Groups, digital banking, impact measurement.	Evolving academic evidence (RCTs) showing nuanced, non-transformative impacts.

Patterns of Alignment and Innovation

The comparative framework reveals several key patterns in how these movements construct their strategies.

A central and unifying theme across all four movements is the sophisticated use of frame extension to bridge the sacred and the secular. Each organization is unequivocally motivated by its Christian faith and values. Opportunity International explicitly cites “Jesus Christ’s call to love and serve the poor”.85 Edify’s vision is for “Flourishing Godly Nations”.69 The Tim Tebow Foundation’s mission is “to bring Faith, Hope and Love” 37, and IJM grounds its work in the theological concept of human dignity derived from being made in God’s image.25 However, while their internal motivation is theological, their external-facing prognostic and diagnostic frames are articulated in language that resonates with broad, secular cultural values. IJM frames trafficking as a violation of universal human rights. Charity: water frames its solution in the language of market transparency and consumer trust. Edify and Opportunity International frame their work using the powerful and widely accepted narratives of entrepreneurship and sustainable economic development. This strategic bridging allows them to build coalitions and mobilize resources far beyond their core religious constituency, attracting support from secular foundations, corporations, governments, and the general public.

Despite this common framing strategy, the analysis highlights a fundamental divergence in their chosen repertoires of action. The movements can be broadly categorized into two groups based on their primary mode of engagement. IJM and, to an increasing extent, TTF employ repertoires of political and legal contention. Their work involves direct engagement with state actors—police, prosecutors, legislators—to change laws, enforce existing ones, and alter state practice.32 Their theory of change is fundamentally political. In stark contrast, Charity: water, Edify, and Opportunity International utilize repertoires of market participation and persuasion. Their work does not primarily seek to challenge or change state policy; instead, it involves creating and delivering products and services—clean water systems, business loans, educational support—within a market-based framework. Their theory of change is economic and cultural. This divergence demonstrates that the category of “Christian social movement” is not monolithic. It encompasses a wide spectrum of strategic orientations, from those that see the state as the primary locus of change to those that see greater potential in market mechanisms and cultural persuasion. This choice of repertoire is not arbitrary but is deeply aligned with each movement’s specific prognostic frame and the context in which it operates.

Section IV: Principles for Building Future Christian Social Movements

The preceding analysis of these four distinct and successful Christian social movements offers a wealth of practical wisdom for graduate students and practitioners seeking to build the next generation of effective, faith-driven campaigns for social change. By distilling the comparative findings, five core principles emerge that can serve as a guide for the strategic architecture of future movements. These principles are not a rigid formula but a set of foundational considerations for navigating the complex terrain of modern social mobilization.

1. Principle of Frame Resonance: Master the Art of the Bridge

The most successful movements are bilingual; they speak fluently the languages of both their faith tradition and the broader secular culture. Future movement builders must master the art of building conceptual bridges. This requires crafting diagnostic and prognostic frames that are authentically rooted in the theological convictions that motivate their core supporters while simultaneously resonating with the widely held cultural values of the broader society they seek to influence. As seen across all four case studies, frames built on secularly-appealing concepts like universal human rights, market transparency, entrepreneurial empowerment, and sustainable development have a far greater reach and mobilizing potential than those that rely exclusively on insider theological language. The key is not to dilute the faith-based motivation but to translate it into a public-facing narrative that is inclusive, accessible, and compelling to a diverse audience of potential allies, donors, and policymakers.

2. Principle of Repertoire Innovation: Match the Toolkit to the Task and the Times

There is no single, universally effective repertoire of action. The choice of tactics must be strategically aligned with both the specific problem a movement seeks to solve and the prevailing cultural and technological context of its target audience. The sharp contrast between the legal-advocacy repertoire of IJM and the digital-marketing repertoire of Charity: water is instructive. One is designed to change state behavior and legal structures; the other is designed to mobilize financial resources from a digitally native generation. Future movement leaders must conduct a clear-eyed assessment: Is the primary goal policy change, resource mobilization, service delivery, or cultural shift? Answering this question is the first step toward selecting or innovating the right toolkit. In the 21st century, this toolkit must be considered in its broadest sense, including not only traditional forms of protest and advocacy but also brand management, digital content creation, financial product design, and technological innovation.

3. Principle of Contextual Intelligence: Navigate the Narrative Battlefield

Social movements do not operate in a vacuum; they exist within a dynamic and often contentious environment of competing narratives and shifting opportunities. Cultivating “contextual intelligence” is therefore a critical leadership capacity. This involves more than just identifying political opportunities. It means developing a deep awareness of the broader political, cultural, and scholarly contexts that surround an issue. Movement leaders must be prepared to anticipate and respond to the arguments of counter-movements and critics. Crucially, as the cases of the anti-trafficking and microlending movements demonstrate, this includes the willingness to engage with critical academic and policy discourses that can challenge, complicate, or refine a movement’s core claims. Ignoring a growing body of critical evidence or a potent counter-narrative is a recipe for losing legitimacy and long-term effectiveness. Contextual intelligence requires humility, a commitment to learning, and the strategic agility to adapt one’s frames and strategies in response to a changing narrative battlefield.

4. Principle of Transformational Motivation: Frame Adherence as Agency

A powerful motivational frame does more than simply ask for support; it offers potential adherents a meaningful identity and a tangible sense of agency within a larger story of transformation. People are not motivated to be passive recipients of a message; they are motivated to become active participants in a solution. The most effective motivational frames position the supporter as a key actor. Charity: water frames its donors as heroes. The Tim Tebow Foundation invites supporters to join a “Rescue Team.” Opportunity International frames its partners as investors in human potential. In each case, the adherent is given a clear and empowering role. Future movements must think carefully about the identity they are offering their supporters. The call to action should be more than a transaction; it should be an invitation to join a community and to become a co-creator of the desired change.

5. Principle of Evidenced Impact: Build Legitimacy Through Proof

In an increasingly data-driven and skeptical philanthropic landscape, particularly among younger generations who value transparency, long-term legitimacy is built and sustained through credible evidence of impact. Compelling storytelling is essential for initial motivation and emotional connection, but it is no longer sufficient on its own. To maintain trust and secure sustainable support, especially from institutional funders, narratives must be backed by rigorous measurement, honest evaluation, and transparent reporting. The success of Charity: water is built on a repertoire of radical transparency. The resilience of Opportunity International and IJM in the face of critical scrutiny is bolstered by their deep institutional commitment to monitoring and evaluation. Future Christian social movements must embed the principles of measurement and learning into their organizational DNA from the outset. This commitment to proving impact is not just a matter of accountability; it is a core strategic imperative for building a movement that can endure, adapt, and earn the public’s trust.

Conclusion

The architecture of contemporary Christian social movements is a complex and sophisticated construction, built upon the strategic alignment of meaning, action, and environment. As the case studies of the anti-trafficking, clean water, low-fee private school, and microlending movements demonstrate, their character and efficacy are not preordained by their faith commitments alone. They are the result of a dynamic interplay of strategically crafted frames, innovative and context-appropriate repertoires, and an astute navigation of their surrounding socio-political contexts. These movements show that faith-based social engagement has evolved far beyond traditional models of charity, embracing a diverse array of strategies that range from direct political contention to sophisticated market participation and digital brand-building.

The continued success of such movements in addressing the world’s most pressing challenges will depend on their capacity for continued learning and adaptation. The principles derived from this analysis—the necessity of resonant frames, innovative repertoires, contextual intelligence, motivational agency, and evidenced impact—offer a roadmap for this ongoing evolution. As these and future movements continue their work, their ability to skillfully bridge the sacred and the secular, to honestly engage with evidence and criticism, and to innovate their methods in response to a changing world will be the ultimate determinants of their lasting contribution to building a more just and compassionate global society.

This report was generated by Google Gemini 2.5 Deep Research using the prompt:
“You are a professor in a doctoral course on Innovation Networks, Thought Leadership & Movement Building at City Vision University. Write a paper for graduate students in the course that explores relates concepts of the sociology and Diffusion of Social Movements like the alignments of Repertoires, Frames and Contexts to the following case studies of Christian social movements:

1. The movement to fight sex trafficking as a way to reframe prostitution (i.e. International Justice Mission and Tim Tebow Foundation)

2. The movement to dig wells and provide water in developing countries (i.e. Charity water)

3. The movement for Dollar a day schools (i.e Edify)

4. The movement to support microlending (i.e. Opportunity International)

Based on these provide principles of how to develop future Christian social movements”
It was reviewed by Dr. Andrew Sears for accuracy.

Works cited

1. Social Movements, 1768-2004 – Charles Tilly – Google Books, accessed September 6, 2025, https://books.google.com/books/about/Social_Movements_1768_2004.html?id=TentAAAAMAAJ
2. Social-Movements-1768-2004-by-Charles-Tilly.pdf – Void Network, accessed September 6, 2025, https://voidnetwork.gr/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Social-Movements-1768-2004-by-Charles-Tilly.pdf
3. Framing Theory | Research Starters – EBSCO, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/social-sciences-and-humanities/framing-theory
4. Framing (social sciences) – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framing_(social_sciences)
5. en.wikipedia.org, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repertoire_of_contention#:~:text=Repertoire%20of%20contention%20refers%2C%20in,%22repertoire%20of%20collective%20action.%22
6. Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and … – ETH, accessed September 6, 2025, https://archiv.soms.ethz.ch/teaching/OppFall09/SnowFrame1986.pdf
7. Sidney Tarrow – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_Tarrow
8. Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment, accessed September 6, 2025, https://fbaum.unc.edu/teaching/articles/AnnRevSoc-2000-Benford.pdf
9. www.ebsco.com, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/social-sciences-and-humanities/framing-theory#:~:text=Social%20movement%20framing%20theory%20attempts%20to%20understand%20the%20way%20in,movements%20are%20understood%20and%20analyzed.
10. Microfoundations of Framing: The Interactional Production of Collective Action Frames in the Occupy Movement | Academy of Management Journal, accessed September 6, 2025, https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amj.2018.1063
11. How Collective Action Communication Frames are used to Drive Action on Climate Justice, accessed September 6, 2025, https://commonslibrary.org/how-collective-action-communication-frames/
12. (PDF) Framing and social movements – ResearchGate, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369099831_Framing_and_social_movements
13. Repertoire of contention – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repertoire_of_contention
14. ‘Repertoires of contention’: examining concept, method, context and practice | Scilit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.scilit.com/publications/d4a16f9316158dd97ef40998efa4c25d
15. Political opportunity – Wikipedia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_opportunity
16. Political Opportunity Structure – (Intro to Comparative Politics) – Vocab, Definition, Explanations | Fiveable, accessed September 6, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/introduction-comparative-politics/political-opportunity-structure
17. Understanding Political Process Theory – ThoughtCo, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.thoughtco.com/political-process-theory-3026451
18. Soc 924 – Framing – Pamela E. Oliver – UW–Madison, accessed September 6, 2025, https://users.ssc.wisc.edu/~oliver/teaching/sm_seminar/topics/soc-924-framing/
19. Considerations on collective action framing from a discursive turn – MARC W. STEINBERG Smith College, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~oliver/SOC924/Articles/SteinbergTiltingFrame.pdf
20. Social Movements as Historically Specific Clusters of Political Performances Author(s): Charles Tilly Source – Void Network, accessed September 6, 2025, https://voidnetwork.gr/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Social-movements-as-historically-specific-clusters-of-political-performances-by-Charles-Tilly.pdf
21. Sex Trafficking | International Justice Mission, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ijm.org/our-work/trafficking-slavery/sex-trafficking
22. Trafficking & Slavery | International Justice Mission, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ijm.org/our-work/trafficking-slavery
23. The Politics of Fighting Child Sex Trafficking in the United States « Social Sciences# «, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.cambridge.org/core/blog/2018/09/17/the-politics-of-fighting-child-sex-trafficking-in-the-united-states/
24. The Influence of Faith-Based Interest Groups on the Development of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 – ScholarWorks@GVSU, accessed September 6, 2025, https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1063&context=gradprojects
25. TTF Rescue Team – Tim Tebow Foundation, accessed September 6, 2025, https://timtebowfoundation.org/rescue-team
26. On Earth and as It Is in Heaven—There Is No Sex Trafficking in Heaven: A Qualitative Study Bringing Christian Church Leaders’ Anti-Trafficking Viewpoints to Trafficking Discourse – MDPI, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/13/1/65
27. Human Trafficking & Church Engagement (U.S. Focus) – Nazarene Compassionate Ministries, accessed September 6, 2025, https://ncm.org/sites/default/files/2021-03/ncm_anti-trafficking-church-engagement_us-focus.pdf
28. Christianity and Human Trafficking – Methodist Theological School in Ohio, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.mtso.edu/site/assets/files/1377/zimmerman-christianity-and-human-trafficking.pdf
29. About | International Justice Mission, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ijm.org/about-ijm
30. Our Work | International Justice Mission, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ijm.org/our-work
31. International Justice Mission | End Modern Slavery for Good, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ijm.org/
32. Policy and Advocacy Lead – International Justice Mission, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ijm.org/careers/field-partner-office-job-openings/policy-and-advocacy-lead-3
33. Research Studies | International Justice Mission, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ijm.org/studies
34. Revisiting Worksites Shows IJM’s Criminal Deterrence Method is Proving Sustainable and Effective – International Justice Mission UK, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ijmuk.org/stories/revisiting-worksites-shows-ijms-criminal-deterrence-method-is-proving-sustainable-and-effective
35. Justice Review – NET, accessed September 6, 2025, https://ijmstoragelive.blob.core.windows.net/ijmna/documents/studies/IJM-Justice-Review.pdf
36. Tim Tebow Foundation | Changing Lives Through Faith, Hope & Love, accessed September 6, 2025, https://timtebowfoundation.org/
37. We are fighting against human trafficking | Join the Fight! – Tim Tebow Foundation, accessed September 6, 2025, https://timtebowfoundation.org/ministries/anti-human-trafficking-1
38. 1 International Justice Mission’s Submission to U.N. Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Slavery, Ms. Urmila Bhoola In – ohchr, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Slavery/SR/AddressingTomorrowSlaveryToday/InternationalJusticeMission.pdf
39. Be a Voice for the Voiceless – Tim Tebow Foundation, accessed September 6, 2025, https://timtebowfoundation.org/advocacy
40. #199 Tim Tebow – Fighting For Our Children Podcast Summary with Shawn Ryan, Tim Tebow – Shortform, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.shortform.com/podcast/episode/shawn-ryan-show-2025-05-12-episode-summary-199-tim-tebow-fighting-for-our-children
41. Religion and Human Trafficking – Catholic Law Scholarship Repository, accessed September 6, 2025, https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1930&context=scholar
42. Human Trafficking and Religious Movements | Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics, accessed September 6, 2025, https://oxfordre.com/politics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228637-e-809?d=%2F10.1093%2Facrefore%2F9780190228637.001.0001%2Facrefore-9780190228637-e-809&p=emailAUXwXiTswXISE
43. The Challenges and Perils of Reframing Trafficking as ‘Modern-Day …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2059&context=facsch_lawrev
44. View of Debate: The Challenges and Perils of Reframing Trafficking as ‘Modern-Day Slavery’, accessed September 6, 2025, https://antitraffickingreview.org/index.php/atrjournal/article/view/138/143
45. View of Debate: The Challenges and Perils of Reframing Trafficking as ‘Modern-Day Slavery’, accessed September 6, 2025, https://antitraffickingreview.org/index.php/atrjournal/article/view/138/136
46. Reconsidering the Use of the Terminology ‘Modern Day Slavery’ in the Human Trafficking Movement | National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC), accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.nsvrc.org/blogs/reconsidering-use-terminology-modern-day-slavery-human-trafficking-movement
47. 100% Model – Charity: Water, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.charitywater.org/our-approach/100-percent-model
48. 7 Nonprofit Marketing tips from ‘Thirst’ by Charity:Water CEO Scott Harrison., accessed September 6, 2025, https://storystruckmarketing.com/blog/7-nonprofit-marketing-storytelling-tips-charity-water-book-thirst
49. How charity: water Paints a Clear Picture With Nonprofit Marketing Copy – MarketSmiths, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.marketsmiths.com/2022/nonprofit-marketing/
50. Charity Water Campaign – Progress Begins & Ends with Content – Outbrain, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.outbrain.com/blog/charity-water-content-marketing-success/
51. Innovative Marketing Strategies Used by Nonprofits to Engage Millennials – SocialTargeter, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.socialtargeter.com/blogs/innovative-marketing-strategies-used-by-nonprofits-to-engage-millennials
52. Generational Giving Report: Millennial Fundraising Trends – Qgiv.com, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.qgiv.com/blog/generational-giving-millennial-giving-trends-preferences-and-patterns/
53. Entrepreneurs’ Philanthropy Across Generational Divides | Fidelity Charitable, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.fidelitycharitable.org/articles/entrepreneurs-philanthropy-across-generational-divides.html
54. Next Generation donors’ charitable giving interests and approaches examined in new study: 2025: News, accessed September 6, 2025, https://philanthropy.indianapolis.iu.edu/news-events/news/_news/2025/next-generation-donors-charitable-giving-interests-approaches.html
55. How to Engage Millennials and Gen Z in Philanthropy, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.pbig.ml.com/articles/millennial-motivation.html
56. Finding, Engaging, and Retaining the Next Donor Generation – CCS Fundraising, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.ccsfundraising.com/insights/engaging-the-next-generation-of-philanthropists/
57. Marketing to Millennials and Gen Z: Strategies for Nonprofits – Strat Labs, accessed September 6, 2025, https://stratlabs.us/marketing-to-millennials-and-gen-z-strategies-for-nonprofits/
58. Gen Z and Millennials Look Beyond Financial Contributions to Take a Holistic Approach to their Charitable Giving – Foundation Source, accessed September 6, 2025, https://foundationsource.com/newsroom/press-releases/gen-z-and-millennials-look-beyond-financial-contributions-to-take-a-holistic-approach-to-their-charitable-giving/
59. The digital fundraising imperative: Why nonprofits must embrace online fundraising now, accessed September 6, 2025, https://fundraiseup.com/blog/why-nonprofits-must-embrace-online-fundraising-now/
60. 2025 Online Fundraising Statistics for Nonprofits, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.nptechforgood.com/101-best-practices/online-fundraising-statistics-for-nonprofits/
61. 3 Promising Findings from Study on Digital Fundraising – NonProfit PRO, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.nonprofitpro.com/article/research-reveals-promising-findings-for-nonprofits-that-prioritize-digital-fundraising/
62. The Impact of Social Media on Charitable Giving for Nonprofit Organization – CSUSB ScholarWorks, accessed September 6, 2025, https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1580&context=jitim
63. Digital Fundraising: How to Make Your Efforts Successful – Allegiance Group, accessed September 6, 2025, https://teamallegiance.com/resources/digital-fundraising/
64. Summary of Tarrow: Power in movement – Adam Brown, BYU Political Science, accessed September 6, 2025, https://adambrown.info/p/notes/tarrow_power_in_movement
65. Why Charity: Water’s 100% Model is Bad for Non-Profits and Donors Alike, accessed September 6, 2025, https://thefundraisingauthority.com/fundraising-ideas/charity-water-100percent-model/
66. Edify – Idealist, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.idealist.org/en/nonprofit/24e15acaf26c43b2b3db5555f5b96891-edify-san-diego
67. Edify | Mission Finder, accessed September 6, 2025, https://missionfinder.org/organizations/edify/
68. Edify | Global Christian Education Nonprofit, accessed September 6, 2025, https://edify.org/
69. The Story of Edify, a Global Education NGO, accessed September 6, 2025, https://edify.org/about-us/
70. Our Core values – Edify.org, accessed September 6, 2025, https://ghana.edify.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/core-values.pdf
71. Core Values & Beliefs – Edify.org, accessed September 6, 2025, https://edify.org/values-beliefs/
72. non-State actors | Right to Education Initiative, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.right-to-education.org/keywords/non-state-actors
73. Clarifying the role of non-state actors in education | UNESCO, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.unesco.org/en/right-education/non-state-actors
74. Reviewing the education partnerships between the state and non-state actors, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.opml.co.uk/insights/reviewing-education-partnerships-between-state-and-non-state-actors
75. Low cost private schools for the poor: What public policy is appropriate? | Comparative-Education.com, accessed September 6, 2025, https://comparative-education.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/low-cost-private-schools-for-the-poor-what-public-policcy-is-appropriate.pdf
76. Low-Cost Private Schools a Success for Developing World Families, accessed September 6, 2025, https://cei.org/blog/low-cost-private-schools-a-success-for-developing-world-families/
77. Private Profit, Public Loss: why the push for low-fee private schools is throwing quality education off track, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.right-to-education.org/resource/private-profit-public-loss-why-push-low-fee-private-schools-throwing-quality-education
78. Low-Fee Private Schools in Peru | Right to Education Initiative, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.right-to-education.org/ar/node/456
79. Low-cost private schools: – Donor Committee for Enterprise Development, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.enterprise-development.org/wp-content/uploads/Low-cost_private_schools.pdf
80. Microenterprise – Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/what-we-do/microenterprise
81. Opportunity International, Inc. – GuideStar Profile, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.guidestar.org/profile/54-0907624
82. Why Microfinance – Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/learn/about/why-microfinance
83. Adventure in Development | Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/news/media-center/opportunity-international-video/adventure-in-development
84. 2023 Annual Report – Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/content/News/Publications/Annual%20Report/annual-report-2023/2023-annual-report-final-digital.pdf
85. Mission, Vision & Motivation | Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/who-we-are/mission-vision-motivation
86. 2O21 ANNUAL REPORT – Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/content/News/Publications/Annual%20Report/annual-report-2021/annual-report-2021.pdf
87. History Wall – Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/esperanza
88. Opportunity International Financial and Tax Documents, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/who-we-are/annual-financial-reports
89. Annual Review | Opportunity International Australia, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org.au/news/annual-review/
90. 2021 Annual Report – Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/2021ar
91. Annual Report 2023 | Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/news/publications/past-annual-reports/annual-report-2023
92. Our Impact – Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/our-impact/
93. Muhammad Yunus History of Microfinance | Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/learn/videos/muhammad-yunus-history-of-microfinance
94. An Introduction to Impact Evaluations with Randomized Designs1 – NYU Wagner, accessed September 6, 2025, https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/faculty/publications/RFN12_Introduction_to_Impact_Evaluations_with_Randomized_Designs.pdf
95. Microcredit: Impacts and promising innovations | The Abdul Latif …, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.povertyactionlab.org/policy-insight/microcredit-impacts-and-promising-innovations
96. Impact evaluation of microfinance: a HEPM perspective – E3S Web of Conferences, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.e3s-conferences.org/articles/e3sconf/pdf/2023/26/e3sconf_uesf2023_09035.pdf
97. Assessing the Impact of Microcredit in Ethiopia | The Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab, accessed September 6, 2025, https://www.povertyactionlab.org/evaluation/assessing-impact-microcredit-ethiopia
98. Assessing the impact of microfinance programming on children: an evaluation from post-tsunami Aceh, accessed September 6, 2025, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4381782/
99. Who We Serve – Opportunity International, accessed September 6, 2025, https://opportunity.org/our-impact/who-we-serve
100. Pentecostalism and Social, Political, and Economic Development – SciSpace, accessed October 13, 2025, https://scispace.com/pdf/pentecostalism-and-social-political-and-economic-development-18ge0plz8c.pdf
101. Chapter 3 Towards a Pentecostal Theology of Social Engagement in – Brill, accessed October 13, 2025, https://brill.com/display/book/9789004384996/BP000005.xml
102. Global Pentecostalism: The New Face of Christian Social Engagement – ResearchGate, accessed October 13, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308233596_Global_Pentecostalism_The_New_Face_of_Christian_Social_Engagement
103. About Us | Adult & Teen Challenge Rehab Program, accessed October 13, 2025, https://teenchallengeusa.org/about/
104. Adult & Teen Challenge – GuideStar Profile, accessed October 13, 2025, https://www.guidestar.org/profile/43-1353323
105. Meet – Teen Challenge of Southern California, accessed October 13, 2025, https://www.teenchallenge.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Meet-Teen-Challenge.pdf
106. Adult & Teen Challenge St. Louis: Home, accessed October 13, 2025, https://atcstl.org/
107. Adult & Teen Challenge, U.S.A., accessed October 13, 2025, https://usmissions.ag.org/ministries/teenchallenge
108. The Dream Center – Great Nonprofits, accessed October 13, 2025, https://greatnonprofits.org/org/the-dream-center
109. Dream Center – End Slavery Now, accessed October 13, 2025, https://www.endslaverynow.org/dream-center
110. About | Kansas City Dream Center, accessed October 13, 2025, https://kcdreamcenter.org/about-2/
111. Mission & Vision • Adult & Teen Challenge • Faith, Hope, & Freedom, accessed October 13, 2025, https://teenchallengeusa.org/about/mission/
112. Frequently Asked Questions | New York Adult and Teen Challenge, accessed October 13, 2025, https://www.newyorkadultteenchallenge.com/about/frequently-asked-questions/
113. Curriculum • Adult & Teen Challenge, accessed October 13, 2025, https://teenchallengeusa.org/curriculum/
114. Residential Programs – Dream Center, accessed October 13, 2025, https://www.dreamcenter.org/residential/
115. Outreach Programs – Dream Center, accessed October 13, 2025, https://www.dreamcenter.org/outreach/
116. Dream Center Network, accessed October 13, 2025, https://www.ocdreamcenter.com/dream-center-network
117. About – Dream Center, accessed October 13, 2025, https://www.dreamcenter.org/about/
118. Pentecostalism – Wikipedia, accessed October 13, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentecostalism
119. Global Teen Challenge – Wikipedia, accessed October 13, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Teen_Challenge
120. Adult & Teen Challenge Connecticut: Reviews, Insurance & Info – Rehabs.com, accessed October 13, 2025, https://rehabs.com/listings/teen-challenge-connecticut-3762956773/

Internal CVU Use Only Link