Methodology

How scoring works

Every free tool and every paid diagnostic scores the same seven dimensions on the same evidence rubric. This page shows exactly how, including every question we ask and where it comes from.

1. The seven dimensions

The InstitutionalOS Health Index rates an organization on seven dimensions. Together they cover what a funder, board, or auditor would examine to judge whether an organization can last.

2. The evidence rubric

Questions describe a practice, and you choose the level you could show evidence for, not how much you agree. If you're between two levels, choose the lower one.

Answer	Means	Scores
1 · Not in place	We don't do this.	0%
2 · Talked about	Discussed or planned, but not started.	25%
3 · Informal	It happens, but isn't written down or consistent.	50%
4 · Documented	Written down and in regular use; you could show it.	75%
5 · Verified	Routine and reviewed; it would hold up if a funder or board checked.	100%

3. How scores are calculated

Each area is the average of its questions on the rubric above (0 to 100%).
Each tool's overall score is the average of its areas.
The Revenue & Growth Score uses your figures instead of answers. Each ratio is scored against a published benchmark: operating reserves (Nonprofit Operating Reserves Initiative and Propel Nonprofits guidance), program expense ratio (BBB Wise Giving Alliance and Charity Navigator), revenue concentration (a single source above 30% is the commonly cited risk threshold), liquidity (current ratio), and donor retention (the Fundraising Effectiveness Project).
Your Health Index combines every tool you've taken. Each dimension is the average of every answer that maps to it, with your latest answer used for each question. The overall score averages the dimensions you've covered.
Your likely constraint is your lowest-scoring area. If your overall score is 60% or higher but one area is under 40%, we flag it: a strong average doesn't cancel out a weak spot, and the weak spot usually limits everything else.
Bands: Foundational (up to 30%), Developing (31 to 55%), Strengthening (56 to 80%), and Resilient (above 80%). The deeper tools use five bands: Critical, At Risk, Stable, Strong, and Resilient, with cutoffs at 20, 40, 60, and 80%.

4. Comparisons with other organizations

When you finish a tool, your scores are logged anonymously, with no name, email, or organization attached, so we can show how you compare with everyone else who has taken it. We only compare answers given on the same rubric. If fewer than five organizations have taken a tool, we label the comparison as early data.

5. Public Form 990 data

If you look up your organization, we pull the summary financials from your filed IRS Form 990s through ProPublica's Nonprofit Explorer. These are the same public records a grantmaker reads. Filings run one to two years behind. Net assets include restricted funds, so they overstate the reserves you can actually spend. Organizations that file the 990-N postcard have no figures to show.

6. Your data

Your answers and your Health Index stay in your browser. Clearing your browser data, or using "Clear my saved answers" on your Health Index, removes them.
To write your summary and show comparisons, we send only your scores, never your name or organization.
Your email, scores, and the organization you looked up reach Franklin only if you choose to email yourself your results. There's no mailing list. See the privacy policy.

7. What free tools can't tell you

A free tool can only report what you tell it. The InstitutionalOS Diagnostic goes further: it checks the evidence behind each answer, reads your Form 990 the way a funder would, tests you against the gates for your stage (Build, Fund, or Sustain), and names the single binding constraint in a written memo with a 90-day plan.

8. The Candid Seal path

We don't issue a seal of our own. Instead, every tool points toward Candid's free Seals of Transparency, which funders already use to screen applicants. In Candid's own research, Seal holders received on average 62% more in contributions. The Candid Seal Path follows Candid's 2026 requirements, which must be earned in order (Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum) and renewed yearly. It links each requirement to the organizational work behind it and to its Health Index dimension. Candid decides every Seal, and Frankly Inspired is not affiliated with Candid.

Level	Candid asks for	Dimension
Bronze	A claimed Candid profile for your organization	Governance and Risk
Bronze	Mission statement	Strategy and Positioning
Bronze	Subject area, population served, and geographic area served	Program and Impact Evidence
Bronze	Mailing address and website (or a note that you have none)	Operations and Infrastructure
Bronze	Primary contact, plus your leader’s name, title, and email	Leadership and Organizational Capacity
Bronze	Donation details: legal name, EIN, and payment address	Revenue and Financial Health
Silver	For each program: name, description, geographic area, subject area, and population served	Program and Impact Evidence
Gold	Latest financials: an audited financial statement, or a Form 990, 990-EZ, 990-PF, or 990-N, for fiscal year 2024 or 2025	Governance and Risk
Gold	Leader demographics: race and ethnicity, gender identity, transgender identity, sexual orientation, and disability status	Leadership and Organizational Capacity
Platinum	Board demographics in the same categories	Governance and Risk
Platinum	At least one quantitative impact metric with a 2025 value	Program and Impact Evidence
Platinum	Your organization’s goals, its strategies, and what it aims to solve	Strategy and Positioning

9. Every question, by dimension

60 questions across 20 areas and 5 tools, plus the Revenue & Growth Score's figures.

1. Strategy and Positioning 9 questions

Sustainability Strategy · Nonprofit Sustainability Self-Assessment

Strategic planning and risk practice drawn from BoardSource and nonprofit strategic-planning standards.

Our organization has a clear, written strategic plan that guides major decisions.
Leadership regularly reviews organizational risks and has a plan to address them.
We have a defined sustainability roadmap for the next 1-3 years.

Strategic Clarity & Public Value · Sustainability Strategy Score

Based on Mark Moore's Strategic Triangle (Harvard Kennedy School).

Our top two or three strategic priorities are written down and used consistently by staff, board, and leadership.
Our strategy clearly identifies who benefits from our work and what specific value we create for them.
We have written criteria for deciding whether a new opportunity or request fits our strategic priorities.

Roadmap & Implementation Discipline · Sustainability Strategy Score

Based on the Balanced Scorecard (Kaplan & Norton, Harvard Business School).

Our strategic priorities are translated into specific initiatives with owners and timelines, not just stated goals.
We track a small set of key metrics regularly (at least quarterly) that show whether we're actually executing the strategy.
Progress against our strategic plan is reviewed and adjusted at least once or twice a year, not filed away until the next planning cycle.

2. Program and Impact Evidence 6 questions

Program & Impact Evidence · Nonprofit Sustainability Self-Assessment

Based on the Performance Imperative framework from the Leap Ambassadors Community and standard outcome-measurement practice.

Each major program has a written logic model or theory of change linking its activities to the outcomes we expect.
We regularly collect outcome data (changes in participants’ lives), not just outputs such as people served or sessions held.
We use our results to improve or change programs, and could show a funder an example of when we did.

Impact & Financial Sustainability Integration · Sustainability Strategy Score

Based on the Matrix Map / "dual bottom line" model (Bell, Masaoka & Zimmerman, "Nonprofit Sustainability").

We track, program by program, which programs are financially self-sustaining and which are subsidized by other revenue.
Decisions about which programs to grow, maintain, or sunset weigh both mission impact and financial contribution together.
Leadership and the board review, at least once a year, which mission-critical programs aren't financially sustainable on their own and how they'll be funded.

3. Revenue and Financial Health 18 questions, plus Revenue & Growth Score figures

Revenue Diversification · Nonprofit Sustainability Self-Assessment

Revenue-concentration and pipeline practice drawn from Nonprofit Finance Fund and AFP guidance.

We track how much of our budget depends on any single funder, and act before one source grows too large a share.
We have active strategies for grants, corporate partnerships, and earned or contracted revenue.
We track and forecast our revenue pipeline at least quarterly.

Gift Portfolio Strategy & Staffing · Institutional Advancement Score

Based on AFP's fundraising staffing and portfolio-size benchmarks.

We segment donors into clear gift levels (e.g., broad-based/annual, mid-level, major, principal) and use a different strategy for each, not one blanket approach.
Major and principal gift relationships are assigned to a specific staff member's portfolio, not left to whoever has time.
Board members and other volunteer leaders have defined roles in identifying prospects and opening doors, not just staff.

Moves Management & Stewardship · Institutional Advancement Score

Based on Cornell's moves-management framework and Penelope Burk's donor-centered fundraising research.

We track donors through defined stages (e.g., identification, qualification, cultivation, solicitation, stewardship), not just "contacted" or "not."
Every gift is acknowledged promptly with more than a generic, automated receipt.
We have a deliberate stewardship plan for donors after the ask, not just before it: impact updates, personal touches, recognition tied to gift level.

Campaign Structure & Readiness · Institutional Advancement Score

Based on standard capital-campaign phase methodology (feasibility, quiet phase, public phase).

Before launching a campaign, we run a real feasibility assessment (confidential interviews with top prospects), rather than setting a goal and hoping.
We understand and plan for a quiet/leadership phase, securing a strong majority of the goal from major donors before any public announcement.
We have a realistic campaign timeline and a specific, compelling case for support, not a general "help us" appeal.

Events as Strategy · Institutional Advancement Score

Based on standard nonprofit fundraising event ROI benchmarks.

We track true net revenue and cost-per-dollar-raised for each event, not just gross revenue.
Our events are planned as cultivation touchpoints, with follow-up for key guests, not only as fundraising transactions.
We evaluate whether each event is worth repeating based on ROI and strategic fit, rather than running it again out of habit.

Planned & Legacy Giving · Institutional Advancement Score

Based on Giving USA's bequest-giving data, the Chronicle of Philanthropy's planned-giving research, and FreeWill's donor bequest data.

We actively invite donors to consider a bequest or legacy gift, through stewardship conversations, website materials, or a named legacy society, rather than only responding if a donor raises it first.
We keep a list of likely bequest prospects based on giving history and engagement, not guesswork.
When a donor lets us know about a planned or bequest gift, we have a deliberate way to steward that commitment (recognition, updates, a legacy society) not just a thank-you and a file.

4. Leadership and Organizational Capacity 12 questions

Leadership & Organizational Development · Nonprofit Sustainability Self-Assessment

Role clarity, bench strength, and board alignment drawn from BoardSource and the Daring to Lead studies.

Roles and performance expectations are clearly defined across the organization.
Leadership has a plan for developing staff and building bench strength.
The board and executive team agree on strategic priorities in writing and revisit them together at least once a year.

Leadership Succession & Bench Strength · Leadership & Operations Score

Based on CompassPoint & the Meyer Foundation's "Daring to Lead" national study of nonprofit executive leadership.

We have a documented, board-approved plan for what happens if our Executive Director leaves unexpectedly.
A specific staff member has been named, and prepared, to step in as interim leader if our Executive Director left unexpectedly.
Our organization actively invests in developing future leaders (training, mentorship, real delegated authority) rather than concentrating leadership in one person.

Organizational Alignment & Execution · Leadership & Operations Score

Based on three outcomes from McKinsey's Organizational Health Index (OHI): Direction, Accountability, and Capabilities.

Our top priorities for this year are written down and shared with staff at every level, so anyone on the team could name them.
Roles, decision rights, and performance expectations are clearly defined and consistently followed.
Staff skills and training needs are reviewed regularly, and gaps are actively addressed.

Change Leadership Capacity · Leadership & Operations Score

Based on John Kotter's 8-Step Change Model (Harvard Business School, "Leading Change").

When we take on a major change, leadership deliberately builds urgency and a guiding coalition to drive it, rather than mandating it top-down.
We communicate a clear vision for change and track visible short-term wins along the way, not just a distant end goal.
We make changes stick by building them into roles, routines, and policies, so they hold after attention moves elsewhere.

5. Operations and Infrastructure 3 questions

Operations & Infrastructure · Nonprofit Sustainability Self-Assessment

Systems, KPI, and documentation practice drawn from the Performance Imperative (Leap Ambassadors).

We use consistent systems (CRM, project management, etc.) to track our work and data.
We have KPIs or dashboards that leadership reviews regularly.
Our operational workflows are documented well enough that a new hire could follow them.

6. Partnerships and Ecosystem 3 questions

Partnership & Ecosystem Strategy · Nonprofit Sustainability Self-Assessment

Partnership formalization practice drawn from collective-impact and MOU standards.

We maintain active partnerships across sectors (education, workforce, government, corporate, community) and know what each one contributes.
We have a deliberate strategy for building and stewarding partnerships, not just ad hoc relationships.
Our key partnerships are formalized (MOUs or agreements) where appropriate.

7. Governance and Risk 9 questions

Governance & Risk · Nonprofit Sustainability Self-Assessment

Based on the governance questions in Part VI of IRS Form 990 and BoardSource research on board practice.

Our board has adopted the core policies Form 990 asks about: conflict of interest, whistleblower, and document retention.
The full board receives our Form 990 before it’s filed and reviews our annual financial statements or audit.
The board formally evaluates the executive director at least once a year.

Governance Health · Leadership & Operations Score

Based on BoardSource's "Leading with Intent" national board-practices research.

Our board recruits deliberately, using a written profile of the skills, perspectives, and community relationships our mission needs.
Board members have written expectations that include advocating for our mission, not just fundraising and compliance, and they meet them.
Board agendas set aside real time for strategy and organizational direction at most meetings, not just reports and fundraising updates.

Risk Identification & Management · Sustainability Strategy Score

Based on the COSO Enterprise Risk Management Framework.

We maintain a written list of our top risks (financial, operational, reputational, and strategic), not just an informal sense of them.
Risk is reviewed on a regular, scheduled basis, not just when something goes wrong or during a funding application.
We have a written contingency plan for losing our largest funding source or a key leader suddenly.

Questions about the method?

Franklin is glad to walk through how any score was reached.

Schedule a Strategy Conversation