Harvard Undergraduate Consulting

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841755113
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cambridge, MA, USA
Phone
6179969126
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,028,901
Expenses
$976,544
Assets
$1,015,228
Liabilities
$39,645

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Daniel Kim (Executive Director President)

People named in this filing

  • Daniel Kim (Executive Director President)
  • Josephine Liu (Treasurer)
  • Derek Liu (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Organized as an educational organization providing the harvard undergraduate student body with a means of exploring opportunities in business and consulting in the areas of technology, life sciences, and sustainability.

What it reported doing in 2025

Cbes members bring a wide range of experiences and skillsets to the table, making up case teams with valuable expertise in fields ranging from biotechnology and cloud computing to water management and battery power. The casework falls into four main areas: marketing strategy, product and consumer research, market entry, and competitive analysis that is tailored to fit each customer in USA and abroad with full use of harvards resources including harvard business schools library, professors, and alumni. The deliverables on a typical case include a presentation with finalrecommendations accompanied by a detailed research report. Harvard undergraduate cbe has completed over 120 cases to date, and the organization students analy

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.9%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.1%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.04; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 28.3% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.9% of revenue deployed · 90.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $887K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.