Each year, the Institute for Nonprofit News (INN) releases the INN Index Report — the most comprehensive study of the nonprofit news sector in North America. Behind the final report lies a rigorous process of data collection, auditing, and analysis designed to answer a fundamental question: How do we know what we know?
To shed light on the mechanics, rigor, and real-world utility of the Index, we sat down with the research team behind the project: INN Research Director Glynnis Melnicove and co-authors Jesse Holcomb and Ha Ta. (Responses have been edited for clarity.)
Methodology for assessing the field
Sharene Azimi: When the INN Index was first launched in 2018, it was framed primarily as a tool to help INN understand its membership and allow members to compare performance with peers. Looking at the Index today, there is a much higher level of methodological detail. How would you describe how this data reflects the overall nonprofit news field, and why is it considered the most comprehensive source available?
Jesse Holcomb: Identifying the outer bounds of an emergent, online news sector is always challenging. To ensure our data is representative, our research team conducted groundwork to determine what percentage of the broader nonprofit news field INN membership accounts for.
Using established research methods—combining and deduplicating various industry and trade lists—we built a master list of the sector. From that, we estimate INN members account for roughly 77% of the known nonprofit news field. This number should be considered an estimate, not exact. But it offers a solid sense of the field.
Additionally, to verify that INN members don’t differ substantively from non-members, we benchmarked our network against non-members across two key indicators:
- Geographic scope (local, state/regional, or national/global orientation)
- Outlet age (established vs. newly launched organizations)
Across both metrics, INN members and non-members were virtually identical—always within a few percentage points. This gives us strong confidence that our network sample is representative of the broader field.
Response rates at census-level accuracy
Sharene Azimi: Completion of the Index is a requirement for newsrooms participating in NewsMatch to receive their matching funds. What impact does that requirement have on data collection and statistical accuracy?
Jesse Holcomb: That requirement drives our survey response rate into the 90%–95% range. Because participation is so high, it is more accurate to view the INN Index as a census of the field rather than a typical statistical sample. When observing differences across budget sizes, geographic scopes, or revenue models, we are seeing real field-wide shifts rather than figures subject to standard sampling errors.
Glynnis Melnicove: To ensure data integrity, required fields prevent submission unless fully completed.
Sharene Azimi: Does requiring NewsMatch participation skew the findings toward smaller outlets or introduce any systemic bias?
Jesse Holcomb: Analyses of the small percentage of INN members that did not respond to the survey show minor differences, some of which we’d expect—such as a lower median revenue of around $300,000 compared to $500,000+ for respondents. However, median staff size (6) and local orientation (47% vs. 54%) remain very close. With non-respondents accounting for only around 30 outlets across the membership, it does not meaningfully affect or skew field-wide conclusions.
Tracking sector resilience
Sharene Azimi: What core health metrics do you track every year, and what has stood out to you over time?
Jesse Holcomb: We track foundational metrics every year: geographic reach, editorial mission (investigative vs. community coverage), operational infrastructure, revenue mix, and staff distribution (editorial vs. revenue/administrative).
What stands out most is how consistent the sector looks year-over-year. Rather than wild volatility, we see steady, incremental trends. That stability provides strong face validity across a sector of 400 to 500 outlets.
I’m also struck by the sector’s resilience. Despite widespread media industry layoffs and closures, nonprofit news maintains an exceptionally low closure rate. While foundation funding accounts for roughly half of overall sector revenue, the remaining half is built on diversified streams—individual donors, earned revenue, sponsorships, and events—which creates long-term organizational endurance.
Glynnis Melnicove: INN tracks the percentage of full members who have closed over the life of membership. This number has typically been less than 10 percent, and often between 5 and 7 percent.
That continuity within a rapidly changing media ecosystem is a major theme as we approach our 10-year retrospective, giving us a clear view of how the field has matured.
Multi-layered auditing
Sharene Azimi: Because survey data is self-reported, what is the process for verifying data accuracy?
Jesse Holcomb: Because the Index requests hard financial and operational figures rather than simple opinions, we apply a strict auditing mindset across a multi-layered review process:
- Fact-Checking & Anomaly Flagging: Every entry is manually reviewed to catch common reporting errors (such as extra zeros on audience or budget numbers).
- Direct Follow-ups: We contact respondents directly to confirm or clarify questionable numbers before finalizing the dataset.
- Data Cleaning & Outlier Auditing: We sort each column of data to identify missing entries or statistical outliers.
Glynnis Melnicove: Standard research methodologies often audit only a 10% sample of survey respondents. We review 100% of the surveys submitted. Last year, we conducted direct follow-ups on 57% of submissions to clarify figures.
We also perform contextual gut-checks across questions—such as cross-referencing an outlet reporting 10 full-time staff against a $50,000 annual budget. That level of qualitative verification cannot be caught by basic automated forms or AI tools.
Benchmarks for INN member newsrooms
Sharene Azimi: How can individual news organizations learn from the INN Index?
Ha Ta: One of the most direct applications of Index data is our Pods benchmarking program, which groups participating members into 16 distinct peer groups based on geographic coverage, audience size, revenue, staffing, and organizational age.
The Index’s high participation rate, combined with the diversity of INN’s membership in organizational size and geographic scope, allows us to create more narrowly defined peer groups while maintaining sufficiently large sample sizes for meaningful benchmarking. Pods provides relevant benchmarks across revenue and expenses, audience and distribution, and staffing. Members can use these insights to assess their performance, set realistic goals, inform business planning, and strengthen fundraising efforts.
Beyond the data, Pods also connects members with peer organizations facing similar opportunities and challenges, turning Index findings into a practical tool for members’ strategic planning.
Integrating Index data with NewsMatch
Sharene Azimi: How do the INN Index and INN’s NewsMatch fundraising program work together?
Ha Ta: Index data helps our development team demonstrate field-wide progress and cohort growth to funders, which in turn helps secure match funding for participating newsrooms.
Jesse Holcomb: Combining both data collection processes minimizes administrative workload for newsrooms and allows the NewsMatch team to evaluate fundraising performance across specific peer groups—such as comparing fundraising efficiency across different budget tiers.
Glynnis Melnicove: It also allows us to analyze targeted NewsMatch campaign performance against full-year individual giving trends for the exact same outlets, giving newsrooms clearer insights into their year-round donor retention and growth.
Timely topics & trends
Sharene Azimi: In addition to core metrics, how do you select the special topical questions included each year (such as AI adoption or staff diversity)?
Glynnis Melnicove: Newsrooms are frequently over-surveyed, so leveraging a single, comprehensive annual collection point allows us to explore pressing environmental factors without burdening outlets with additional requests. Special topics stem from observed trends in the core data or urgent industry developments—like generative AI, economic shifts, or changing audience habits.
Jesse Holcomb: Beyond supporting individual newsroom benchmarking, the Index serves as foundational data for the trade press (Nieman Lab, Poynter, CJR), coalition groups (Rebuild Local News), policymakers, and funders. When major decisions are made about journalism funding or policy, the Index provides the reliable empirical foundation needed to advocate for the sector.
Approaching 10 years of data
The INN Index today represents a much larger dataset than when INN launched the survey launched in 2018, reflecting the growth of the field. The 2026 INN Index collected data from 437 organizations, representing more than 90 percent of INN’s newsroom members and including a mix of global, national, regional, statewide and local outlets that cover both general news and topical beats. In comparison, the first Index survey represented just 88 organizations, or 59 percent of INN’s newsroom members at the time.
Later this month, INN will publish a brief report exploring how nonprofit newsrooms have been affected by the current political climate.
The next INN Index survey will go out to newsrooms in January 2027, collecting the 10th straight year of data. This spring, INN expects to publish a 10-year overview as well as the latest core health statistics.
For current Index reports, see inn.org/index
