Our Just Future

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
930977166
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2023
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
(503) 548-0200
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$24,649,354
Expenses
$24,368,159
Assets
$56,689,875
Liabilities
$34,350,827

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • VERLEA BRIGGS (PRESIDENT)
  • LYDIA GRAY-HOLIFIELD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ANDY MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANDY MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $179,311 total reported compensation
  • ALEX CHESTER (CFO): $94,185 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our Just Future works to end homelessness and poverty in our community because everyone deserves a safe place to call home.

What it reported doing in 2023

Career and economic development services - the organization provided employment, job search and training services to 1,017 people during this year. Of those, 60% were either unhoused or at risk of becoming unhoused when they enrolled, and over 65% obtained jobs with an average starting wage of $19.75 per hour. Partnerships with the city of gresham, the city of portland/prosper portland, worksystems, inc., and Oregon department of human services/immigrant and refugee community organization ("irco") made these servicespossible.all employment programs at ojf are designed to help folks overcome barriers to employment and create their own paths toward career-track jobs with living wages. Two examples are:1. Living solutions is for residents of the city of gresham who face the most significant barriers. The vast majority of these participants enter the program with zero income, have very limited employment skills and don't have access to the training needed to secure a job. In this program, those who secured employment started with an average wage of $17.85 per hour and increased their annual earnings from from $9,538 to $31,835 (a 234% increase).2. Community works was designed to help people leave the state's temporary assistance to needy families ("tanf") program by obtaining jobs with wages sufficient to support their families. We collaborate with three partners to provide this program: the immigrant and refugee community organization (irco), self enhancement, inc. (sei) and the Oregon department of human services.volunteering across programs - community members are an essential part of our work and, while the ways they can engage has shifted since covid, their engagement has remained robust, especially providing home-cooked meals for residents in our shelters and driving to collect and deliver donations. This year, volunteers invested fewer hours than prior years because we are still building back after the covid pause, but still 250 wonderful volunteers gave approximately 1,200 hours to help our programs meet the needs of participants. We couldn't do what we do without them and firmly believe that volunteers gain as much from participating as program participants do! We look forward to inviting even more volunteers back into our work this coming year. Building connected communities is an important part of our vision for more just future.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 64% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 80% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 52
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.8%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 95.9%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.1%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.33; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.61; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.9% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 94.8% of revenue deployed · 95.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $23.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 13 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 28 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.