Whether organizations stray from their founding purpose as they grow is a long-standing question in organizational research, yet most empirical work infers “mission drift” from financial ratios that can move for reasons unrelated to purpose. This study measures drift directly, from organizations’ own words. Using the publicly filed mission and program descriptions in U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Form 990 returns, drift is operationalized as the semantic change between each organization’s earliest and latest stated mission across a three-to-six-year window. On an analytic panel of 22,638 longitudinally observed full-990 filers, drawn from a random sample of 25,000 organizations within a measured population of 292,351, three independent text measures agree closely with one another (rank correlations 0.85–0.99) but are uncorrelated with a financial-efficiency comparison (ρ ≈ 0.02), indicating that the measure captures stated-mission change rather than relabelled efficiency. Stability is the norm: 63.9% of organizations show effectively no change in their stated mission. Among the organizations that do change, pre-specified regressions show that faster revenue growth is associated with greater drift and that older organizations drift less, both net of size, sector, and funding mix; a hypothesized effect of shifting funding composition is not supported. Observable structure explains only a small share of the variation in drift, so most of it is idiosyncratic. The contribution is a transparent, reproducible, public-data instrument for studying mission fidelity over time, together with what is, to the authors’ knowledge, one of the first large-sample maps of which organizational characteristics accompany holding versus drifting from a stated purpose.

mission drift, nonprofit organizations, organizational growth, mission statements, text analysis, IRS Form 990

Independent Sector, “The charitable sector,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://independentsector.org/about/the-charitable-sector/

B. Armendáriz and A. Szafarz, “On mission drift in microfinance institutions,” in The Handbook of Microfinance, B. Armendáriz and M. Labie, Eds. World Scientific, 2011, pp. 341–366. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814295666_0016

W. K. Smith, M. Gonin, and M. L. Besharov, “Managing social-business tensions: A review and research agenda for social enterprise,” Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 407–442, 2013. https://doi.org/10.5840/beq201323327

P. Esposito, E. Doronzo, and S. L. Dicorato, “The financial and green effects of cultural values on mission drifts in European social enterprises,” Business Strategy and the Environment, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 1–29, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3115

J. Ma, I. A. Ebeid, A. de Wit, M. Xu, Y. Yang, R. Bekkers, and P. Wiepking, “Computational social science for nonprofit studies: A toolbox of methods,” VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 52–63, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-021-00414-x

D. Cer, M. Diab, E. Agirre, I. Lopez-Gazpio, and L. Specia, “SemEval-2017 Task 1: Semantic textual similarity multilingual and crosslingual focused evaluation,” in Proceedings of the 11th International Workshop on Semantic Evaluation (SemEval-2017), Association for Computational Linguistics, 2017, pp. 1–14. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/S17-2001

C. Skelcher and S. R. Smith, “Theorizing hybridity: Institutional logics, complex organizations, and actor identities: The case of nonprofits,” Public Administration, vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 433–448, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12105

R. Mersland and R. Ø. Strøm, “Microfinance mission drift?” World Development, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 28–36, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2009.05.006

N. Siebold, F. Günzel-Jensen, and S. Müller, “Balancing dual missions for social venture growth: A comparative case study,” Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, vol. 31, no. 9–10, pp. 710–734, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2018.1554710

G. L. Chikoto, Q. Ling, and D. G. Neely, “The adoption and use of the Hirschman–Herfindahl Index in nonprofit research: Does revenue diversification measurement matter?” VOLUNTAS, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 1425–1447, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-015-9562-6

Z. Lee and H. Bourne, “Managing dual identities in nonprofit rebranding: An exploratory study,” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 794–816, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764017703705

C. Connolly and N. Hyndman, “The donor–beneficiary charity accountability paradox: A tale of two stakeholders,” Public Money & Management, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 157–164, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2017.1281629

P. Hawkins, “Diversity for nonprofits: Mission drift or mission fulfillment?” Journal of Diversity Management, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 41–50, 2014. https://doi.org/10.19030/jdm.v9i1.8621

J. D. Lecy and D. M. Van Slyke, “Nonprofit sector growth and density: Testing theories of government support,” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 189–214, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mus010

N. Reimers and I. Gurevych, “Sentence-BERT: Sentence embeddings using Siamese BERT-networks,” in Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2019, pp. 3980–3990. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/D19-1410

M. Antoniak and D. Mimno, “Evaluating the stability of embedding-based word similarities,” Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, vol. 6, pp. 107–119, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00008