Governance
The Foundation runs on a set of public documents. Each document can only be changed through the rules defined inside it. Some parts of these documents cannot be changed at all — not by any vote, not by any future trustee, not by any commercial licensee.
Two-entity architecture
The Foundation is organized as two distinct legal entities working in concert. The split resolves a structural tension that a single-entity 501(c)(3) cannot resolve: the IRS dissolution rules for an exempt operating charity require operating assets to be distributed to another exempt organization or government, while the Charter's anti-capture defense requires the trademarks and the custodial governance authority to be held under terms that cannot be lost in a dissolution scenario.
-
The Open Honest Foundation, Inc.
Missouri 501(c)(3) public-benefit nonprofit corporation. Incorporated 2026-05-05 under RSMo Chapter 355. The operating charity. Conducts the research, runs the educational and certification programs, and publishes the standards. Standard nonprofit board of directors. Standard IRS-compliant dissolution.
-
The Open Honest Trust
Separate custodial entity (statutory trust or LLC; in parallel formation). Holds the "Open Honest" and "Certified Honest Practitioner" trademarks. Exercises the governance custodianship described in the Charter (Independent + Interested Trustees, anti-capture provisions, reversion-to-Author dissolution). Licenses the trademarks to the Foundation under terms set by the Trust.
The two entities are connected by a trademark license agreement between the Trust (licensor) and the Foundation (licensee). The license is conditioned on the Foundation continuing to operate consistent with its stated charitable purposes and immutable governance provisions. The Trust may revoke the license through the procedure specified in its organizational documents. Revocation is the structural anti-capture defense: it ensures the trademark is administered in trust for the mission and is not subordinated to any operational decision of the Foundation that would deviate from the immutable provisions.
Trust trademark licensing and the flow of mark-derived revenue
The Trust's licensing posture is integrity-protective rather than revenue-maximizing. Licenses to commercial third parties are conditioned on the licensee's compliance with the methodology specifications and the Foundation's published quality thresholds. Licensing fees, where charged, are set at cost-recovery rates intended to fund the Trust's administrative costs of mark stewardship (trademark registration and renewal, legal defense of the marks against dilutive or deceptive use, and modest administrative expense for the trustees acting in their custodial capacity).
The Foundation acknowledges that the value of the marks is created and enhanced by the Foundation's research and educational work, and the Foundation-Trust revenue architecture is structured accordingly. Net licensing revenue received by the Trust, after the Trust's bona fide administrative costs of mark stewardship, is paid to the Foundation as charitable grants or otherwise applied by the Trust to activities that further the charitable purposes the marks represent (cross-traditional convenings, open-access publication of Foundation research, support for the Foundation's certification program). The Trust does not retain accumulated net commercial licensing revenue for distribution to its trustees or to the founder personally; trustee compensation is limited to reasonable reimbursement and modest fixed administrative honoraria, with no performance-based or revenue-share component.
The Trust's "reversion-to-Author" dissolution clause does not encompass accumulated commercial licensing revenue derived from value created by the Foundation's research and educational work. On dissolution of the Trust, any such accumulated revenue is directed to a successor charitable organization that qualifies as exempt under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. This carve-out from the reversion-to-Author clause will be made explicit in the Trust's organizational documents at the time of the Trust's constitution.
Lobbying and political-campaign activity
The Foundation does not and will not engage in any substantial lobbying activity within the meaning of Section 501(c)(3), and does not and will not participate or intervene in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. This representation is consistent with the activity-limitation clause of Article IV §3 of the Articles of Incorporation, which adopts the Internal Revenue Service Publication 557 model language verbatim.
Filed and incorporation documents
-
Articles of Incorporation
The legally operative document filed with the Missouri Secretary of State on 2026-05-05 (Order No. 15324723). Establishes the corporation under RSMo Chapter 355, sets out the exempt purpose in IRS Pub 557 verbatim language, includes the activity-limitation and dissolution clauses, and contains the related-party-transaction protections of Article V. Available on request from contact@openhonest.org.
-
Formal Charitable Purpose Statement
Standalone formal statement of the Foundation's charitable purpose, prepared for the fiscal sponsor and as supporting documentation for IRS Form 1023. Written exempt-purpose-first: scientific research and public education as the mission, with software, instruments, and platforms as subordinate delivery mechanisms. Available on request from contact@openhonest.org.
-
Statement of Charitable Intent
Plain-language attestation mirroring the Articles, with elaborated sections on founder independence, no-private-benefit protections, IRS application intent, and operational track record. Available on request from contact@openhonest.org.
Governance documents
-
Foundation Charter
The founding document. Sets out what the Foundation does, what it does not do, what trustees owe to the mission, and which rules cannot be changed. Articles I, II, III, IV, VI, and VIII can never be changed. The Charter's custodial authority is exercised through the Open Honest Trust.
-
Constitution
The rules for how the Honest project itself is run, separate from the Foundation but linked to it.
-
Code of Conduct
The rules for how everyone in the project must behave, with a clear appeals process. Covers what to do when moderators or maintainers themselves break the rules. The Foundation hears the appeals.
-
Mission
What the Honest project is for. The Foundation Charter says trustees must put this mission first when they make decisions.
-
Trademark Moratorium
How the trademarks are split. "Open Honest" and "Certified Honest Practitioner" are held by the Open Honest Trust and licensed to the Foundation under terms set by the Trust. "Honest" (without "Open") is held by Adam Wasserman personally for his commercial work, including the Honest Code book. The two trademarks are administered as distinct marks with distinct holders.
-
Proposed Anti-Capture Amendments
Proposed extra rules to protect the Foundation from being taken over by companies, by governance bodies, or by future trustees acting outside the mission. Still in the proposal phase.
-
Public Registry of Enforcement Actions
A public record of every enforcement action ever taken under the Code of Conduct: the evidence, the rule that was broken, the result, the response from the person involved, and the appeal outcome. Currently empty.