Charity intelligence & nonprofit due diligence
Independent charity research for donors, advisors, and institutions.
We follow the money, test impact claims, reconcile conflicting records, and answer the question most charity profiles avoid: should you give now?
Enter an organization name or 9-digit EIN.
No Halo Profile · free
See identity, filings, financial history, governance, compensation, fundraising economics, audit evidence, and verified developments. It is useful evidence, not a fresh recommendation.
Search a charityDeep Research · research credits
A fresh investigation tests current evidence, answers six required donor questions, pursues material leads, and passes through separate verification before giving a donor action.
Analyst Review · human
For consequential giving, an analyst adds donor-specific investigation, document follow-up, direct questions, and charity contact or right of reply when appropriate.
Commission researchNo Halo Advisor Workspace
Keep client portfolios, charity shortlists, private notes, tasks, team access, saved comparisons, monitoring, evidence, audit history, and CSV exports in one working system.
Deep Research credits and commissioned analyst services are separate. Subscription fees pay for workflow, never a favorable research conclusion.
The paid research product
More data is not enough. A donor pays No Halo to convert the evidence into a clear, current action while preserving the source trail and the uncertainty behind it.
A high-confidence case for a meaningful unrestricted gift. This is intentionally a high bar.
Giving appears reasonable, but the donor should understand specific limitations or tradeoffs.
Discrete unanswered issues could change the decision and should be settled before giving.
The current evidence does not establish enough confidence to recommend a meaningful gift yet.
The current verified evidence affirmatively weighs against giving at this time.
A cautious factual description can still support a clear donor action. Missing evidence is not misconduct. A pending allegation is not a finding. No Halo says what the record establishes, then separately says what a donor should do with that information.
No Halo Intelligence
Regulatory actions. Court matters. Audit findings. Leadership changes. Financial distress. Independent impact research. Corrections. Final outcomes.
No Halo tracks the underlying event, not just the headline. Multiple stories can point to one event, and an allegation can later become a dismissal, settlement, judgment, correction, or other final outcome. The same verified Event Ledger that powers the public feed is checked during future research.
Open No Halo IntelligenceThe research contract
Every investigation answers these questions and follows material leads they uncover. If an answer remains unavailable, the report explains what was checked and what the donor should ask next.
Operating model, program flows, grants, and what donor money finances.
Liquidity, reserves, restrictions, fundraising, compensation, and resilience.
Independent outcomes, evaluation quality, and whether the evidence applies today.
Filings, audits, annual reports, government records, and public claims checked together.
Regulators, litigation, audits, related parties, governance, and credible reporting.
Capacity, commitments, bottlenecks, funding need, and room for more funding.
Research discipline
We do not hand you a question and walk away. Research first. Then ask. Prepare copy-ready outreach, the exact diligence request, and the evidence that could change the decision.
A charity statement establishes what it says, not whether the claim is independently true. Missing is not bad. It lowers confidence, not character.
Ratios provide context. Outcome evidence, evidence confidence, and coverage remain separate from the donor action.
Every conclusion requires a fresh material-event sweep. The database is reusable. The donor conclusion is not.
Diagnostic score: shown only when coverage is sufficient. Evidence confidence and coverage remain separate from the donor action.
Read the complete methodologyResearch desk
You should not need No Halo to tell you every answer. You should be better at spotting the questions after using it.
Use the filing without mistaking accounting categories for outcomes.
Donor guideUseful accounting context can still be terrible evidence of effectiveness.
Donor guideFinancial resilience and room for more funding are related, but not identical.
Donor guidePeriod, entity scope, accounting basis, restrictions, and donated goods can change the number.
Independence
No organization can pay for a favorable assessment, remove a finding, or purchase a place in a comparison. Organizations can supply evidence, dispute facts, and use the correction and right-of-reply process. They cannot negotiate the conclusion.
