Good Jobs First

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
820542649
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2024940888
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,092,208
Expenses
$1,707,757
Assets
$1,722,032
Liabilities
$188,987

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GREG LEROY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ARLENE MARTINEZ (DEPUTY EXEC DIRECTOR): $193,208 total reported compensation
  • GREG LEROY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $171,731 total reported compensation
  • PHILIP MATTERA (RESEARCH DIRECTOR): $163,542 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Good jobs first is a research and policy resource center for constituency-based groups and public officials seeking to make economic development incentives more accountable and effective. We also promote corporate accountability and smart growth for working families.

What it reported doing in 2025

Continuing to assist constituency-based groups, news media, and/or public officials in many states on accountable economic development, corporate accountability, and smart growth for working families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 45
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.82 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -56.4%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.01; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $193K · 11 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.