Bbb Institute for Marketplace Trust

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208814392
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Suite, VA, USA
Phone
7032479374
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Business and Industry

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$948,152
Expenses
$1,021,268
Assets
$754,756
Liabilities
$120,260

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MELISSA LANNING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MELISSA LANNING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $183,521 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The bbb institute's mission is to advance marketplace trust through education, innovation, and collaboration with our network of bbbs and partners. This is accomplished through research that challenges assumptions and delivers new insights about scams, fraud, and other marketplace threats; consumer education resources, programs, and campaigns that empower the public, including vulnerable populations, to choose better businesses and avoid scams; partnerships with industry experts and stakeholders from the public and private sectors to create innovative resources and programs.

What it reported doing in 2025

Bbb scam tracker & bbb scam survival toolkit: bbb scam tracker is an online tool that enables consumers to report scam activity. Following the upgrade in 2022, bbb institute continues to expand the features of the platform to help protect the general public. In 2024, we launched the bbb scam survival toolkit (bbb.org/scamsurvivalkit) in partnership with amazon and capital one. This toolkit connects scam survivors with the resources they need to restore their financial, mental, and emotional well-being. Bbb institute hosted the second annual scam survivor day in 2025 with the goal of reducing the stigma of scams and to address the needs of scam survivors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.2%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 83.6%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $61.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.7%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.74; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.2% of revenue deployed · 83.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $854K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $184K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.