Center for Open Science, Inc.

Charlottesville, VA   |


Our mission is to increase openness, integrity, and reproducibility of research.

Ruling year info


Co-founder, Executive Director

Brian Nosek

Main address

210 Ridge McIntire Road Suite 500

Charlottesville, VA 22903 USA

Show more contact info



NTEE code info

Science and Technology Research Institutes, Services N.E.C. (U99)

IRS filing requirement

This organization is required to file an IRS Form 990 or 990-EZ.

Sign in or create an account to view Form(s) 990 for 2021, 2020 and 2019.
Register now



Programs and results

What we aim to solve

SOURCE: Self-reported by organization

The Center for Open Science (COS) exists to increase openness, integrity, and reproducibility of research. The academic research enterprise is beset by culture, systems, markets, and institutional structures that create a gap between scholarly values and the policies, incentives, and norms that shape behavior. This creates friction in the pace of discovery to advance knowledge, solutions, and cures. COS is a culture change organization that aims to align scholarly values with scholarly practices. It does so by developing and advancing a systems-level strategy for changing culture and behavior toward greater rigor, transparency, and sharing of research process, outputs, and outcomes.

Our programs

SOURCE: Self-reported by organization

What are the organization's current programs, how do they measure success, and who do the programs serve?

Open Science Framework (OSF)

The Open Science Framework (OSF) provides free and open source project management support for researchers across the entire research lifecycle. As a collaboration tool, the OSF helps researchers work on projects privately with a limited number of collaborators and make parts of their projects public, or make all the project publicly accessible for broader dissemination. As a workflow system, the OSF enables connections to the many services researchers already use to streamline their process and increase efficiency. As a flexible repository, it can store and archive research data, protocols, and materials.

Population(s) Served

SHARE is building a free, open, data set about research and scholarly activities across their life cycle.

Population(s) Served

Assessing the credibility of research claims is a central and continuous part of the scientific process. However, current assessment strategies often require substantial time and effort. To accelerate research progress, the Center for Open Science (COS) partnered with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's (DARPA) program Systematizing Confidence in Open Research and Evidence (SCORE) in 2019 on work towards developing and deploying automated tools that provide rapid, scalable, and accurate confidence scores for research claims.

Since then, COS has completed extraction of scientific claims from a stratified sample of social-behavioral science papers. In total 7,066 claims were extracted manually, enabling confidence scores to be assigned by human forecasters and algorithms. Concurrently, COS worked with hundreds of researchers to conduct replications and reproductions on a subset of these extracted claims.

Population(s) Served

Transparency, open sharing, and reproducibility are core values of science, but not always part of daily practice. Journals, funders, and scholarly societies can increase reproducibility of research by adopting the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines and helping them evolve to meet the needs of researchers and publishers while pursuing the most transparent practices.

Population(s) Served

Journal policies can be evaluated based on the degree to which they comply with the TOP Guidelines. This TOP Factor is a metric that reports the steps that a journal is taking to implement open science practices, practices that are based on the core principles of the scientific community. It is an alternative way to assess journal qualities, and is an improvement over traditional metrics that measure mean citation rates. The TOP Factor is transparent (see underlying data and the evaluation rubric) and will be responsive to community feedback.

Population(s) Served

Where we work


The Einstein Foundation Award 2021

Einstein Foundation

Our results

SOURCE: Self-reported by organization

How does this organization measure their results? It's a hard question but an important one.

Number of OSF registered users

This metric is no longer tracked.
Totals By Year
Related Program

Open Science Framework (OSF)

Type of Metric

Output - describing our activities and reach

Direction of Success


Goals & Strategy

SOURCE: Self-reported by organization

Learn about the organization's key goals, strategies, capabilities, and progress.

Charting impact

Four powerful questions that require reflection about what really matters - results.

We envision a future scholarly community in which:

The process, content, and outcomes of research are openly accessible by default;
All scholarly content is preserved and discoverable, and openness, interoperability, and transparency are normative for scholarly services;
All stakeholders are included and respected in the research lifecycle; and
All stakeholders share pursuit of truth as the primary incentive and motivation for scholarship.

Achieving the mission requires culture change in the incentives that drive researchers’ behavior, the infrastructure that supports research, and the business models that dominate scholarly communication.

To scale sustainable adoption of open behaviors by researchers, COS:

1. provides open infrastructure that makes it possible to do the behaviors,
2. conducts user-centered product development to make it easy to do the behaviors,
3. supports grassroots organizing to activate and train adopters and make their behavior
visible to shift community norms toward the behaviors,
4. offers solutions to journals, funders, and institutions to nudge incentives to make it
desirable to do the behaviors, and
5. provides and promotes a policy framework for stakeholders to make the behaviors

What started as a small project in Charlottesville, Virginia in the United States, has evolved to be a more distributed
workforce with more than 50 employees. COS is committed to openness and treating scholarly research and the infrastructure supporting it as public goods. All COS produced data, materials, code, and reports are openly licensed and publicly accessible to the maximum extent possible. COS made its progress with a dedicated, diverse, and skilled core staff, and, critically, thousands of individual researchers and stakeholders who provided time, energy, and action as a service because of their shared vision for improving the research culture. COS’s contributions outstrip its staff size and resources because of the collaborative partnerships with so many groups across the research landscape.

COS accomplishments are noted in the Impact Summary, and future goals are noted in the Goals section.

How we listen

SOURCE: Self-reported by organization

Seeking feedback from people served makes programs more responsive and effective. Here’s how this organization is listening.

done We demonstrated a willingness to learn more by reviewing resources about feedback practice.
done We shared information about our current feedback practices.
  • How is your organization using feedback from the people you serve?

    To identify and remedy poor client service experiences, To identify bright spots and enhance positive service experiences, To make fundamental changes to our programs and/or operations, To inform the development of new programs/projects, To identify where we are less inclusive or equitable across demographic groups, To strengthen relationships with the people we serve, To understand people's needs and how we can help them achieve their goals

  • Which of the following feedback practices does your organization routinely carry out?

    We collect feedback from the people we serve at least annually, We take steps to get feedback from marginalized or under-represented people, We aim to collect feedback from as many people we serve as possible, We take steps to ensure people feel comfortable being honest with us, We look for patterns in feedback based on people’s interactions with us (e.g., site, frequency of service, etc.), We engage the people who provide feedback in looking for ways we can improve in response, We act on the feedback we receive, We tell the people who gave us feedback how we acted on their feedback, We ask the people who gave us feedback how well they think we responded

  • What challenges does the organization face when collecting feedback?

    We don't have any major challenges to collecting feedback


Center for Open Science, Inc.

Unlock financial insights by subscribing to our monthly plan.


Unlock nonprofit financial insights that will help you make more informed decisions. Try our monthly plan today.

  • Analyze a variety of pre-calculated financial metrics
  • Access beautifully interactive analysis and comparison tools
  • Compare nonprofit financials to similar organizations

Want to see how you can enhance your nonprofit research and unlock more insights?
Learn more about GuideStar Pro.


The people, governance practices, and partners that make the organization tick.


Connect with nonprofit leaders


Build relationships with key people who manage and lead nonprofit organizations with GuideStar Pro. Try a low commitment monthly plan today.

  • Analyze a variety of pre-calculated financial metrics
  • Access beautifully interactive analysis and comparison tools
  • Compare nonprofit financials to similar organizations

Want to see how you can enhance your nonprofit research and unlock more insights? Learn More about GuideStar Pro.


Connect with nonprofit leaders


Build relationships with key people who manage and lead nonprofit organizations with GuideStar Pro. Try a low commitment monthly plan today.

  • Analyze a variety of pre-calculated financial metrics
  • Access beautifully interactive analysis and comparison tools
  • Compare nonprofit financials to similar organizations

Want to see how you can enhance your nonprofit research and unlock more insights? Learn More about GuideStar Pro.

Center for Open Science, Inc.

Board of directors
as of 10/26/2023
SOURCE: Self-reported by organization
Board chair

Alison Mudditt

CEO, Public Library of Science (PLOS)

Alison Mudditt

Public Library of Science, CEO; COS Board Vice Chair

Jon Hill

Investure, LLC, Managing Director; COS Board Treasurer

Dr. Marcia McNutt

National Academy of Sciences, President

Dr. Rebecca Saxe

BCS at MIT, Professor of Cognitive Science

Dr. Brian Nosek

Center for Open Science, Executive Director and Co-Founder (Ex-Officio)

Dr. Arturo Casadevall

Chair, Molecular Microbiology & Immunology; Alfred & Jill Sommer Professor and Chair; Bloomberg Distinguished Professor; Johns Hopkins University

Dr. George Banks

Associate Professor of Management, University of North Carolina Charlotte

Dr. Lara Mangravite

Sage Bionetworks, President

Dr. Elaine Chen

Cummings Professor of the Practice of Entrepreneurship, Tufts University; Director of Tufts Entrepreneurship Center, Tufts Gordon Institute; Founder and Managing Director, ConceptSpring

Ms. Elaine Westbrooks

Vice Provost for University Libraries and University Librarian, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Dr. Maryrose Franko

Executive Director of the Health Research Alliance (HRA)

Dr. Susanna-Assunta Sansone

Professor of Data Readiness; Associate Director, Oxford e-Research Centre; and Academic Lead for Research Practice, University of Oxford

Board leadership practices

SOURCE: Self-reported by organization

GuideStar worked with BoardSource, the national leader in nonprofit board leadership and governance, to create this section.

  • Board orientation and education
    Does the board conduct a formal orientation for new board members and require all board members to sign a written agreement regarding their roles, responsibilities, and expectations? Yes
  • CEO oversight
    Has the board conducted a formal, written assessment of the chief executive within the past year ? Yes
  • Ethics and transparency
    Have the board and senior staff reviewed the conflict-of-interest policy and completed and signed disclosure statements in the past year? Yes
  • Board composition
    Does the board ensure an inclusive board member recruitment process that results in diversity of thought and leadership? Yes
  • Board performance
    Has the board conducted a formal, written self-assessment of its performance within the past three years? Yes

Organizational demographics

SOURCE: Self-reported; last updated 10/26/2023

Who works and leads organizations that serve our diverse communities? Candid partnered with CHANGE Philanthropy on this demographic section.


The organization's leader identifies as:

Race & ethnicity
Gender identity
Male, Not transgender (cisgender)
Sexual orientation
Heterosexual or straight
Disability status
Person without a disability

Race & ethnicity

Gender identity


Sexual orientation


Equity strategies

Last updated: 10/20/2023

GuideStar partnered with Equity in the Center - an organization that works to shift mindsets, practices, and systems to increase racial equity - to create this section. Learn more

Policies and processes
  • We use a vetting process to identify vendors and partners that share our commitment to race equity.
  • We help senior leadership understand how to be inclusive leaders with learning approaches that emphasize reflection, iteration, and adaptability.
  • We measure and then disaggregate job satisfaction and retention data by race, function, level, and/or team.