A first Informational Health Check of the Brazilian Social Good Sphere
Info-biorhythm: how soon Brazil’s leading SGOs make their accounts public
With info-biorhythm Brazil 2026, thedotgood introduces its first Informational Health Check, run over the Brazilian Social Good Sphere.
A funder weighing a grant, a partner preparing an agreement, a journalist checking a claim: each wants a current picture of an organization. Its annual report tells what it does, for whom and to what effect. Its audited financial statements show the resources behind that work. When those documents become public matters.
thedotgood calls it info-biorhythm: how soon after year-end the organization makes its annual report and audited financial statements public, and how steady that timing is year after year. It is one dimension of thedotgood‘s Informational Health Check. Brazil is its first national benchmark.
See the full benchmark: the 33 leading Brazilian SGOs, and how soon each made its 2024 accounts public.
Info-biorhythm in Brazil: six months, on average
We reviewed 33 SGOs listed in thedotgood‘s 2026 Top 100 leading SGOs in Brazil, on fiscal year 2024, using public evidence only: the date each document first appeared on the organization’s own site or public channels.
- 184 days: audited financial statements public (median, early July).
- 176 days: annual report public (median, late June).
- 17 of 33 published their audited statements after six months.
- 8 of 33 did so within four months.
The time goes before the audit is signed
The auditor typically signs at the beginning of May. Once the audit is signed, publication tends to follow within about two weeks. Most of the time, then, goes into closing the books and completing the audit, not into putting the documents online.
The typical SGO made its audited statements public at day 184, about four weeks before the tax filing deadline.
A deadline to file, none to publish
Brazilian nonprofits, including the associations and foundations exempt from income tax, must file their tax return, the ECF, with the Federal Revenue Service by the end of July of the following year. That return is not made public. In the United States, by contrast, the equivalent return, the Form 990, is public by law: anyone can read it. Nothing prevents a Brazilian SGO from publishing its ECF. In practice, very few do. And for most associations and foundations, no law requires the annual report or the financial statements to be published, or sets a date for it.
The calendar makes the point. The typical SGO in the panel made its audited statements public at day 184, about four weeks before the tax filing deadline. When an SGO shares its documents, and how soon, is largely its own choice. That choice is what info-biorhythm measures, and it leaves the Brazilian Social Good Sphere a real margin for progress.
Why it matters
Social Good Organizations call for public support and donors. Their discipline in making their key reporting documents public is paramount to making that call a success. It builds trust, and it shows how good they are at using their resources to deliver social profit. That is what it is all about.
As you read the full benchmark, see which SGOs are among the fastest to publish their key reporting documents.
The legal context is on our Brazil country page, and the method on About info-biorhythm.
What comes next
The USA follows, under the same method. And SGOs in the Brazil panel can still improve their date: if a document first appeared online earlier than we found, send thedotgood the public link. Enjoy the read. Corrected on Oct. 14, 2026: after an SGO sent us its public links, a recheck of the original-language copies moved nine publication dates earlier. The medians are now 184 days (audited financial statements, was 188) and 176 days (annual report, was 184); 17 of 33 SGOs published their audited statements after six months (was 18). The ten fastest are unchanged.
Related articles
Innovation and Disruption: The Way of the Social Good Organization
The Definition of an NGO: History, Non-Governmental Realities, and Current Limitations
In June 2012, The Global Journal commissioned an independent review of its own NGO ranking methodology — a candid, self-critical examination of how the Top 100 NGOs list was built, what it could and couldn’t claim, and where its real limitations sat.
About the 2013 Methodology Paper
Published in February 2013 and authored by Cecilia Cannon, then completing her PhD in Political Science/International Relations at Geneva’s Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies (IHEID), the paper situates the ranking within a broader shift: after decades of largely unquestioned goodwill, NGOs entered a period of genuine public scrutiny in the years following the 2010 Haiti earthquake, as their scale, credibility, and accountability came under closer examination.
What the ranking set out to do
The paper outlines four stated aims behind the ranking: to showcase the genuine diversity of organisations operating under the “NGO” label; to evaluate them comparatively, across geography and activity; to stimulate real debate around impact, innovation, and sustainability; and to track how the sector changes year over year.