nonprofit transparency platform

Candid / GuideStar

A nonprofit-data infrastructure organization behind GuideStar profiles and transparency seals for nonprofit public information. Candid / GuideStar scores well because the model leaves more value with stakeholders and ownership is comparatively aligned, though person-dependent governance and ideological disavowal still limits the evaluation.

Why this matters: Nonprofit data infrastructure determines what donors, journalists, and researchers can see about civil-society organizations.

Letter grade B Qualified Medium confidence (AI) Rubric gcd-rubric-v1 Last reviewed May 7, 2026

Final Score 44* B - Qualified

BQUALIFIED44 pts

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

Base Material43

Bonus+7

Cap66No structure cap

After Cap50

Penalties-6

!Not Verified

Represent this organization?

Request verification to have the evidence record checked against primary materials and organization-supplied documents. Verification does not buy a higher score; scores change only when review finds factual errors, omissions, or miscalibration.

Request verification

Evaluation Overview

B - Qualified

The score turns mainly on Extraction, with the largest penalty coming from Reversibility.

Strengths

Extraction7/10
Ownership6/10
Governance6/10

Penalties

Reversibility-5
Ideological Disavowal-1

Evidence state

ConfidenceMedium confidence (AI)
ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)
Linked claims15
Direct axis claims15
Coverage15/15

Scoring Axes

Axis	Score	Why this score
Ownership ? Control rights: shareholder-dominated at 0, worker cooperative control at 10.	6 / 10	Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. That places Candid / GuideStar in the middle of Ownership: there is some mission, member, producer, or public-interest constraint, but decisive control is not fully democratic. The value stays below the top tier because the linked record does not show full democratic control, non-extractive lock-in, or complete stakeholder protection on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 125 scored entries below, 20 tied, 81 above on Ownership. Linked evidence context Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. [1] Candid / GuideStar is a nonprofit information platform, not a democratically controlled institution owned by donors, nonprofit workers, or beneficiaries. [2]
Governance ? Binding decision authority: centralized control at 0, democratic stakeholder control at 10.	6 / 10	Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. That places Candid / GuideStar in the middle of Governance: there are accountability mechanisms, but they stop short of broad democratic control. The value stays below the top tier because the linked record does not show full democratic control, non-extractive lock-in, or complete stakeholder protection on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 148 scored entries below, 14 tied, 64 above on Governance. Uncertainty Priority page: add more axis-specific research over time to make the comparative placement harder to dispute. Linked evidence Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. [1]
Extraction ? Surplus allocation, wage share, CEO pay ratio, margins, and structured extraction judgment.	7 / 10	Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. That places Candid / GuideStar in the middle of Extraction: the institution creates real value but still leaves room for rent extraction, unequal bargaining, or surplus capture. The value stays below the top tier because the linked record does not show full democratic control, non-extractive lock-in, or complete stakeholder protection on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 140 scored entries below, 32 tied, 54 above on Extraction. Linked evidence context Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. [1] Candid reduces information extraction in philanthropy by publishing nonprofit data, while still centralizing access and interpretation inside a nonprofit data platform. [3]
Labor Sovereignty ? Worker power: coercive conditions at 0, co-determination or ownership at 7. Employee dissatisfaction matters only when source-backed evidence shows concrete limits on worker agency, such as coercive scheduling, retaliation, wage theft, harassment, unsafe conditions, suppression of worker voice, or extreme turnover.	3 / 7	Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. That places Candid / GuideStar in the middle of Labor Sovereignty: workers or participants have some protection or agency, but not enough binding power to control the relationship. The value stays below the top tier because the linked record does not show full democratic control, non-extractive lock-in, or complete stakeholder protection on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 45 scored entries below, 66 tied, 115 above on Labor Sovereignty. Linked evidence context Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. [1] Candid’s nonprofit profiles and transparency seals provide public data but do not give nonprofit workers or affected communities binding control over listed organizations. [4]
Solidarity with the Unemployed ? Treatment of exits and nonworkers, including severance, redeployment, and non-competes.	2 / 7	Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. That keeps Candid / GuideStar low on Solidarity with the Unemployed: the model provides little protection for people who leave, are excluded, or cannot bargain from employment. The value is above zero only where the linked record still shows some real function, constraint, or public value on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 31 scored entries below, 49 tied, 146 above on Solidarity with the Unemployed. Linked evidence context Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. [1] Candid’s public nonprofit data can help route resources toward need, but the platform itself does not directly protect unemployed or excluded people. [5]
Loss-Bearing Fidelity ? Willingness to absorb costs to preserve values, workers, users, and public obligations.	5 / 7	Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. That places Candid / GuideStar in the middle of Loss-Bearing Fidelity: there is some willingness to preserve obligations, but the record still leaves meaningful risk-shifting concerns. The value stays below the top tier because the linked record does not show full democratic control, non-extractive lock-in, or complete stakeholder protection on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 119 scored entries below, 43 tied, 64 above on Loss-Bearing Fidelity. Linked evidence context Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. [1] Candid encourages disclosure of mission, programs, finances, and results, but it does not itself bear the operational risks of the nonprofits it profiles. [6]
Market Conduct ? Pricing fairness, switching costs, lock-in, and rent extraction.	5 / 5	Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. That places Candid / GuideStar high on Market Conduct: pricing, access, switching, and bargaining practices show restraint compared with ordinary rent-seeking competitors. A still-higher or maximum value requires stronger proof that this structure is durable, broad, and not merely discretionary. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 180 scored entries below, 46 tied, 0 above on Market Conduct. Linked evidence context Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. [1] GuideStar profiles and transparency seals improve donor and researcher market conduct by reducing search costs and making nonprofit claims easier to compare. [7]
Product Integrity ? Preservation of quality rather than degradation for monetization.	5 / 5	Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. That places Candid / GuideStar high on Product Integrity: the core offering is genuinely useful and comparatively less dependent on traps, degradation, or harmful dependencies. A still-higher or maximum value requires stronger proof that this structure is durable, broad, and not merely discretionary. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 134 scored entries below, 92 tied, 0 above on Product Integrity. Linked evidence context Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. [1] Candid’s core product is nonprofit data and research infrastructure with real public value for donors, researchers, journalists, and civil society. [8]
Scale Integrity ? Whether growth improves or degrades fairness and accountability.	4 / 5	Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 109 scored entries below, 81 tied, 36 above on Scale Integrity. Linked evidence context Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles. [1] Candid scales nonprofit transparency across many organizations, making its data model valuable while also giving one platform substantial interpretive power. [9]

Penalties

Penalty	Applied	Why this penalty
Reversibility ? Applied when positive conduct depends on current living leaders, founders, family owners, or other person-contingent governance rather than durable structure. Range: -5 to 0.	-5	The organization’s positive conduct depends materially on current leadership, nonprofit or platform policy, accreditation rules, religious culture, or discretionary operating practice rather than on locked worker or affected-stakeholder control. The organization’s positive conduct depends materially on current leadership, nonprofit or platform policy, accreditation rules, religious culture, or discretionary operating practice rather than on locked worker or affected-stakeholder control. That warrants a severe Reversibility penalty because favorable conduct depends on current people or discretionary leadership rather than locked stakeholder structure. The value is near the floor because the conduct appears central, large-scale, repeated, or institutionally powerful rather than incidental. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 0 scored entries below, 95 tied, 131 above on Reversibility. Linked evidence The organization’s positive conduct depends materially on current leadership, nonprofit or platform policy, accreditation rules, religious culture, or discretionary operating practice rather than on locked worker or affected-stakeholder control. [14]
Ideological Disavowal ? Concealed ideology presented as neutrality, expertise, professional necessity, public-service administration, market inevitability, or non-ideological common sense while exercising power. Range: -3 to 0.	-1	Candid / GuideStar's public framing is assessed as ideological-disavowal evidence because Candid / GuideStar shows bounded neutrality theater: some contested choices are softened through… Candid / GuideStar's public framing is assessed as ideological-disavowal evidence because Candid / GuideStar shows bounded neutrality theater: some contested choices are softened through expertise, public-interest, professional, market, safety, or institutional language, but the record does not show dominant concealment of. That warrants a limited Ideological Disavowal penalty because the institution presents situated, contested choices as neutrality, expertise, inevitability, safety, or common sense. The value is limited because the linked record shows a real problem but not one that dominates the profile on this axis. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Ideological Disavowal 0 to -3 recalibration: 0 for explicit standpoint or no penalty-level neutrality theater; -1 for bounded softening of contested choices; -2 for strong neutrality theater by a powerful institution; -3 for major gatekeeping or coercive power presented as neutral, necessary, objective, or non-ideological. Uncertainty This recalibration uses public self-presentation and profile evidence; later review should add direct language-analysis evidence for high-impact institutions. Linked evidence Candid / GuideStar's public framing is assessed as ideological-disavowal evidence because Candid / GuideStar shows bounded neutrality theater: some contested choices are softened through expertise, public-interest, professional, market, safety, or institutional language, but the record does not show dominant concealment of standpoint. [15]

Bonus Credits

Bonus	Credit	Why this credit
Openness to Dissent ? Credit for tolerating internal, user, customer, worker, and public dissent without retaliation, capture, or viewpoint laundering.	1 / 3	Candid increases public visibility into nonprofit records, though the data platform itself remains centrally governed. Candid increases public visibility into nonprofit records, though the data platform itself remains centrally governed. That supports partial Openness to Dissent credit because people can criticize, dissent, or challenge the institution without being managed into silence. The value remains partial because the linked record does not show the practice as comprehensive, durable, or central enough for full credit. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 188 scored entries below, 11 tied, 27 above on Openness to Dissent. Linked evidence Candid increases public visibility into nonprofit records, though the data platform itself remains centrally governed. [10]
Constitutional Spirit ? Credit for respecting constitutional rights and civil-liberties norms even where private law does not strictly require it.	2 / 3	Candid’s nonprofit information infrastructure supports public accountability by making civil-society records easier to inspect. Candid’s nonprofit information infrastructure supports public accountability by making civil-society records easier to inspect. That supports partial Constitutional Spirit credit because the institution respects speech, privacy, due process, conscience, or civil-liberties norms beyond bare legal compulsion. The value remains partial because the linked record does not show the practice as comprehensive, durable, or central enough for full credit. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 188 scored entries below, 23 tied, 15 above on Constitutional Spirit. Linked evidence Candid’s nonprofit information infrastructure supports public accountability by making civil-society records easier to inspect. [11]
Good Deal ? Credit for unusually fair value: durable quality, fair pricing, low lock-in, and clear customer surplus.	1 / 3	Candid makes nonprofit profile data broadly searchable, creating public-interest value for donors and researchers. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 163 scored entries below, 21 tied, 42 above on Good Deal. Linked evidence Candid makes nonprofit profile data broadly searchable, creating public-interest value for donors and researchers. [12]
Cost Transparency ? Credit for clear posted prices, all-in fees, unit costs, public rate cards, margin/cost visibility, or surplus-allocation transparency, especially in markets where opaque quotes, hidden fees, or individualized pricing are normal.	3 / 3	GuideStar transparency seals encourage nonprofits to publish progressively richer information on mission, programs, finances, and results. Calibration notes Comparative anchor: Column-spectrum position: 214 scored entries below, 12 tied, 0 above on Cost Transparency. Linked evidence GuideStar transparency seals encourage nonprofits to publish progressively richer information on mission, programs, finances, and results. [13]

Confidence Basis

Confidence is computed from the evidence trail and review state, not typed into the profile by hand.

Medium 78/100

15 verified linked claims 15 direct axis claims 0 disputed claims 15/15 components covered

This confidence label measures the source-backed evidence trail. AI-scaffolded scores remain tentative until human review.

Claim confidence 13/20

15 verified linked claims

Source quality 12/18

Best source per verified claim, weighted by institutional reliability

Direct axis-specific claims 14/18

15 direct claims across 15 active components

Dispute load 12/12

0 disputed claims on this entity

Recency 10/10

Newest accepted timestamp: May 13, 2026

Reviewer status 7/12

Human-reviewed components score higher than AI scaffolding

Component coverage 10/10

15/15 evidence-bearing components have direct support

Evidence State

Profile stateAI draft / human-pending

VerificationUnverified

ConfidenceMedium confidence (AI)

ThoroughnessDeveloped (AI)

Correction routeUse “Challenge this rating” for factual errors, missing counterevidence, source problems, or calculation mistakes.

Company responseCompany representatives can submit source-backed corrections; payment never changes scores or reviewer authority.

Claims and Sources

Claims are the evidence record. Each claim needs a source link, axis category, status, confidence level, and timestamp before it can support a score.

* Tentative scaffolding score. Not human-checked or final.

1Candid combines Foundation Center and GuideStar work to provide nonprofit data, research, and GuideStar nonprofit profiles.

Governance Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%
GuideStar Profile UpdatesGeneral web source · 58%

2Candid / GuideStar is a nonprofit information platform, not a democratically controlled institution owned by donors, nonprofit workers, or beneficiaries.

Ownership Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%
GuideStar Profile UpdatesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid Nonprofit ProfilesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid / GuideStar official siteGeneral web source · 58%

3Candid reduces information extraction in philanthropy by publishing nonprofit data, while still centralizing access and interpretation inside a nonprofit data platform.

Extraction Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%
GuideStar Profile UpdatesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid Nonprofit ProfilesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid / GuideStar official siteGeneral web source · 58%

4Candid’s nonprofit profiles and transparency seals provide public data but do not give nonprofit workers or affected communities binding control over listed organizations.

Labor Sovereignty Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%
GuideStar Profile UpdatesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid Nonprofit ProfilesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid / GuideStar official siteGeneral web source · 58%

5Candid’s public nonprofit data can help route resources toward need, but the platform itself does not directly protect unemployed or excluded people.

Solidarity Unemployed Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%
GuideStar Profile UpdatesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid Nonprofit ProfilesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid / GuideStar official siteGeneral web source · 58%

6Candid encourages disclosure of mission, programs, finances, and results, but it does not itself bear the operational risks of the nonprofits it profiles.

Loss Bearing Fidelity Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%
GuideStar Profile UpdatesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid Nonprofit ProfilesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid / GuideStar official siteGeneral web source · 58%

7GuideStar profiles and transparency seals improve donor and researcher market conduct by reducing search costs and making nonprofit claims easier to compare.

Market Conduct Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%
GuideStar Profile UpdatesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid Nonprofit ProfilesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid / GuideStar official siteGeneral web source · 58%

8Candid’s core product is nonprofit data and research infrastructure with real public value for donors, researchers, journalists, and civil society.

Product Integrity Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%
GuideStar Profile UpdatesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid Nonprofit ProfilesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid / GuideStar official siteGeneral web source · 58%

9Candid scales nonprofit transparency across many organizations, making its data model valuable while also giving one platform substantial interpretive power.

Scale Integrity Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 12, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%
GuideStar Profile UpdatesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid Nonprofit ProfilesGeneral web source · 58%
Candid / GuideStar official siteGeneral web source · 58%

10Candid increases public visibility into nonprofit records, though the data platform itself remains centrally governed.

Openness To Dissent Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%

11Candid’s nonprofit information infrastructure supports public accountability by making civil-society records easier to inspect.

Constitutional Spirit Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%

12Candid makes nonprofit profile data broadly searchable, creating public-interest value for donors and researchers.

Good Deal Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Candid Nonprofit ProfilesGeneral web source · 58%

13GuideStar transparency seals encourage nonprofits to publish progressively richer information on mission, programs, finances, and results.

Cost Transparency Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

GuideStar Seals of TransparencyGeneral web source · 58%

14The organization’s positive conduct depends materially on current leadership, nonprofit or platform policy, accreditation rules, religious culture, or discretionary operating practice rather than on locked worker or affected-stakeholder control.

Reversibility Verified Medium confidence Human-reviewed May 7, 2026

Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%

15Candid / GuideStar's public framing is assessed as ideological-disavowal evidence because Candid / GuideStar shows bounded neutrality theater: some contested choices are softened through expertise, public-interest, professional, market, safety, or institutional language, but the record does not show dominant concealment of standpoint.

Ideological Disavowal Verified Medium confidence AI-generated / human-pending May 9, 2026

AI scaffold

Candid / GuideStar official siteGeneral web source · 58%
Candid AboutOfficial self-description · 68%
GuideStar Profile UpdatesGeneral web source · 58%

Alternatives

Competitors

AGOOD58 GiveWell charity evaluator · same market AGOOD55 CharityWatch charity watchdog · same market AGOOD55 FairTest nonprofit standardized-testing watchdog · same market AGOOD55 Protect Borrowers / Student Borrower Protection Center nonprofit student-loan borrower advocacy organization · same market AGOOD52 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau federal consumer-finance watchdog agency · same market AGOOD51 National Association of Community Health Centers nonprofit community-health-center advocacy organization · same market BQUALIFIED48 BBB Wise Giving Alliance charity watchdog · same market BQUALIFIED44 Charity Navigator charity evaluator · same market

Help Improve This Profile

Submit source-backed evidence or challenge a specific claim, source, axis value, or calculation below.

How This Page Is Maintained

Evidence comes in through contributors, is checked by verifiers, and is synthesized by reviewers. Founder authority remains narrow and visible; scores recalculate when verified claims or the rubric change.

Civic Note

Incorporation, limited liability, market access, and other institutional privileges are public grants. Good Companies Directory treats those privileges as conditional on accountability to workers, users, communities, and the public.

Submit evidence for Candid / GuideStar Add one source-backed fact for review.

Challenge this rating Point to a specific score, claim, source, or calculation problem.

Audit Log

Recent public changes for this company or group. The full audit log is part of the Transparency record.

May 7, 2026 at 12:00 AM UTC ai-scaffolding directory-expansion

Added source-backed evaluation during accreditation/watchdog, charity/humanitarian, fundraising-platform, and religious-institution expansion pass.

View Full Audit Log