Harvard Business Impact
Legal name: Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 043177990
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Brighton, MA, USA
- Phone
- 6177837426
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Printing, Publishing
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $313,544,802
- Expenses
- $312,827,050
- Assets
- $195,247,927
- Liabilities
- $144,252,508
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SARAH MCCONVILLE ULICNY (CO-PRESIDENT)
- ELLEN M DESMARAIS (CO-PRESIDENT)
- PAUL BILLS (SR. VICE PRESIDENT, CFO)
Highest reported compensation
- VG NARAYANAN (DIRECTOR): $942,993 total reported compensation
- SURAJ SRINIVASAN (AUDIT COMMITTEE CHAIR): $874,879 total reported compensation
- DAS NARAYANDAS (FORMER DIRECTOR): $811,596 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
For decades, Harvard Business Impact has helped organizations around the world achieve their goals by developing their leaders. Leveraging the remarkable depth and breadth of Harvard Business School, Harvard Business Review, and a network of industry experts, we create research-based and contextualized active learning experiences informed by the latest thinking in leadership and management. From on-demand digital learning to immersive cohort-based journeys, we support capability building at scale to help organizations align leadership development with their most critical business priorities. Meet our leadership team.
What it reported doing in 2024
See Schedule O Management Education in Support of Higher Education
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 92% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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 filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 58
- Accountability: 61
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.9%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 93.5%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 10th 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: 0.2%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.62; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.74; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 92.9% of revenue deployed · 93.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $292.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $943K · 24 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $11.6M reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 217 filed related-organization links
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.