Neither database contains current versions of the data that UBI Charitable and OpenResearch have claimed to have shared in the past.
YC Research’s original conflict of interest policy, which Das shared, required company insiders to be open about transactions where their impartiality could be questioned and for the board to decide how to proceed.
Das says the rules “may have changed since the OpenResearch policy change (including the name change from YC Research), but the core elements have remained the same.”
No website
The UBI charity was launched in 2020 with a $10 million donation from OpenAI, as first reported by TechCrunch last year. According to government documents, the UBI Charitable aims to employ the more than $31 million received by the end of 2022 to support initiatives aimed at offsetting the “social impact” of recent technologies and ensuring no one is left behind. She has donated primarily to CitySquare in Dallas and Heartland Alliance in Chicago, which are working on a range of projects to fight poverty.
UBI Charitable does not appear to have a website, but it does share a San Francisco address with OpenResearch and OpenAI, and OpenAI employees have been listed in UBI Charitable government documents. All three Form 990 filings since the company’s launch state that all documents, including governing documents, financial statements and conflict of interest policies, were available upon request.
Rick Cohen, director of operations and communications for the National Council of Nonprofits’ advocacy group, says “available upon request” is a standard response plugged by accounting firms. OpenAI, OpenResearch and UBI Charitable have always worked with the same San Francisco accounting firm, Fontanello Duffield & Otake, which did not respond to a request for comment.
Miscommunication or penniless oversight can lead to a standard response about submitting documentation, “even if the organization didn’t intend for it to be released,” Cohen says.
The disclosure question was included in what is known as Form 990 in 2008 facilitate the increasingly intricate world of nonprofits demonstrate that they are following best management practices, at least as the IRS suggests, says Kevin Doyle, senior director of finance and accountability at Charity Navigator, which rates nonprofits on helping donors in making decisions about donations. “Such transparency is a way to indicate to donors that their money will be used responsibly,” Doyle says.
OpenResearch solicits donations on its website, and the UBI Charitable said in its latest IRS filing that it has received more than $27 million in public support. Doyle says Charity Navigator data shows that donations tend to flow to organizations that they rate higher, with transparency in the factors being measured.
It is certainly not unusual for organizations to share a wide range of data. Charity Navigator found that most of the approximately 900 largest U.S. nonprofits that rely on individual donors publish financial statements on their websites. It does not track disclosure of regulations or conflict of interest policies.
Charity Navigator publishes its own audited financial statements and has at least eight non-standard policies, including rules on how long it keeps records, how it handles whistleblower complaints and what gifts employees can accept. “Donors can look at what we do and form their own opinion, rather than acting as a black box and saying, ‘Please give us money, but don’t ask any questions,’” Doyle says.
Cohen of the National Council of Nonprofits warns that over-disclosure of information can create security gaps. For example, publishing a disaster recovery plan may provide a tip-off to computer hackers. He adds that just because organizations have a policy on paper doesn’t mean they follow it. But knowing what they should do to assess potential conflicts of interest could still allow for greater public accountability than would otherwise be possible, and if AI could be as consistent as Altman predicts, scrutiny could be much needed.