Consensus Building Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
043186073
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cambridge, MA, USA
Phone
6174921414
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,572,809
Expenses
$6,398,953
Assets
$10,001,347
Liabilities
$1,518,990

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • STACIE SMITH (MANAGING DIR., SR. MEDIATOR II/CLERK): $237,853 total reported compensation
  • BENNETT BROOKS (SENIOR MEDIATOR II): $235,706 total reported compensation
  • PATRICK FIELD (SENIOR MEDIATOR II): $233,191 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 consensus building institute (cbi), founded in 1993, improves the way that leaders collaborate to make organizational decisions, achieve agreements, and manage multi-party conflicts and planning efforts. A nationally and internationally recognized not-for-profit organization, cbi provides strategic planning, organizational development and high-skilled facilitation for state and federal agencies, non-profits, and international development agencies around the world. Our staff are experts in facilitation, mediation, capacity building, citizen engagement, and organizational strategy and development. We are committed to using our skills to build collaboration on today's most significant social, environmental, and economic challenges. We work within and across organizations, sectors, and stakeholder groups.

What it reported doing in 2025

Stakeholder assessment: our mediators conduct assessments to clarify issues, determine the likelihood of getting to an agreement, highlight possible pathways forward, and outline the likely benefits, risks, and costs of proceeding.process design: we design and lead a wide spectrum of collaborative and conflict resolution processes, from one-time meetings to multi-year collective impact efforts. Our facilitators and mediators employ a rich set of techniques and tools, ranging from joint fact-finding to scenario planning to creative visioning.group facilitation: we facilitate multi-stakeholder groups to help create solutions to complex problems, keeping a laser focus on stakeholders' goals, concerns, and values, always working on behalf of the group as a whole. For virtual meetings, we offer a full range of tools and supports for effective online communication and collaboration.mediation: we mediate conflicts, helping the parties engage, communicate, explore, and settle differences. Throughout the process, we focus on building trust, maintaining impartiality, and protecting confidentiality.commercial funds: our commercial funds are related to our mission driven work. Commercial funds that are not mission driven are routed through consensus building services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.1%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.56; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.4%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.1% of revenue deployed · 87.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $238K · 20 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.