Conflicts of Interest
What counts as a conflict
A conflict of interest exists when a reasonable observer could conclude that a person’s judgment, recommendations, or editorial decisions might be influenced by a material relationship.
We disclose the following types of conflicts:
Financial conflicts
-
employment or contract work with relevant entities
-
equity ownership, tokens, or significant holdings
-
paid advisory roles
-
significant gifts, travel, or honoraria
Institutional / governance conflicts
-
board membership, officer roles, or governance authority in relevant entities
-
formal representation of organizational interests
Professional / role conflicts
-
ongoing consulting, lobbying, or policy advocacy roles that intersect with ICI outputs
Personal conflicts
-
close personal relationships that create an appearance of bias in a specific decision (handled case-by-case)
Who is covered
This policy applies to:
-
core team members
-
steering/advisory members (if applicable)
-
paid contractors working on substantive content
-
reviewers who provide substantial input on key outputs (where feasible)
What we disclose (and what we don’t)
We aim to disclose enough to evaluate influence without over-collecting personal data.
We generally do not publish sensitive personal details unless essential for transparency.
Disclosure process & management
Disclosure timing
-
Initial disclosure: required upon joining the team / advisory role / major contributor status.
-
Ongoing updates: within 30 days of a material change, or prior to participation in a decision affected by the relationship.
-
Publication-time check: disclosures are reviewed before releasing major framework/tool updates.
How conflicts are managed
When a conflict is material to a decision, we use one or more of:
-
recusal from the decision
-
public disclosure alongside the output
-
independent review by someone without the conflict
-
documented dissent or minority report (when relevant)
If a conflict cannot be managed adequately, the person may be excluded from that workstream.
​
Founding Humanity Partner potential conflicts will be disclosed by April 1, 2026.
Transparency
Last Updated March 3, 2026
​
This page describes:
​
-
How ICI is funded and supported
-
Who makes decisions and how
-
What counts as a conflict of interest
-
How conflicts are disclosed and managed
-
How to request corrections or report integrity concerns
If you have questions about anything here, contact us at andi@lumenlawcenter.com or reach out to any Founding Humanity Partner.
What's this page?
1
ICI commits to:
​
-
Public-interest orientation: We prioritize public benefit, institutional integrity, and accountability in AI governance.
-
Transparency by default: We disclose funding, material relationships, and decision processes relevant to our work.
-
No undisclosed influence: We do not accept hidden conditions that determine our conclusions or public outputs.
-
Traceable work: We version key outputs and maintain a changelog so updates are understandable and attributable.
-
Corrections and accountability: We maintain a clear corrections process and respond to credible concerns.
Mission-aligned commitments
2
Current funding status
​
As of March 3, 2026, ICI’s funding status is:
​
-
Financial support: Lumen Law Center [$1,000-$10,000], Andi Mazingo, Esq. [$1,000-10,000]
-
In-kind support: Pro bono legal services and administrative support from Lumen Law Center; work on concept note, funding meetings, and online content by all Founding Humanity Partners
-
Fiscal sponsorship: Lumen Law Center
-
Affiliations: Independent
Donor influence policy
​
-
Funding does not confer editorial control over ICI’s research, recommendations, framework language, or public outputs.
-
We do not accept funding conditioned on:​
-
veto rights over publication,
-
suppression of findings,
-
exclusive access to drafts beyond standard review processes,
-
specific conclusions.
-
How we disclose funding
​
We disclose:
​
-
the identity of funders providing material support (or explain why disclosure is not possible),
-
the form of support (financial vs in-kind),
-
whether support is restricted to a specific workstream,
-
and any relevant governance rights (if any).
Funding & support
3
How decisions are made
​
ICI decisions fall into three categories:
​
Editorial / publication decisions (what gets published and when)
Owned by: Founding Humanity Partner current operational lead, Andi Mazingo
​
Decision rule:
​
-
for meaning change in ICI-affiliated materials, we make a good-faith attempt for consensus; if none, operational lead decision with recorded dissent;
-
for no meaning change, team members can publish anytime.
Meaning changes require elevated review and are released as a blog post with a public rationale.
​
Framework architecture decisions (core definitions, principles, and structure)
Owned by: Founding Humanity Partner [philosophical / engineering] lead
Decision rule:​
​
-
for core changes (purpose, scope, key definitions, core principles & commitments, tool architecture, decision rights, governance model, material conflict-of-interest policy, and reuse terms) supermajority [majority +1] required;
-
for non-core substantive changes (editorial improvements, routine updates, added references, and implementation details that do not alter core): good-faith attempt for consensus followed by _____ lead decision with recorded dissent.
​​
Core changes require elevated review and are released as a new version with a public rationale.
​
Operational decisions (budget, vendors, logistics)
​
Owned by: Founding Humanity Partner operational lead, Andi Mazingo
Decision rule: good-faith attempt for consensus followed by operational lead decision with recorded dissent in an internal, auditable ledger.
Participation and review
​
We use the following inputs where feasible:
​
-
structured stakeholder interviews
-
open calls for feedback / public comment windows
-
expert review (with disclosed reviewer relationships when material)
We do not treat feedback as binding unless explicitly stated.