Jobs for America's Graduates Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521194546
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
7037069650
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Employment Procurement Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,698,536
Expenses
$7,775,246
Assets
$3,646,869
Liabilities
$1,492,776

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

Leadership & pay

34 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JANELLE DURAY (PRESIDENT AND CEO)
  • JAN ENNIS (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, OPERATIONS)

Highest reported compensation

  • JANELLE DURAY (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $320,551 total reported compensation
  • JAN ENNIS (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, OPERATIONS): $149,136 total reported compensation
  • JAMES WALL (VP MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS): $106,286 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To empower the nation's young people with the skills and support to succeed in education, employment, and life.

What it reported doing in 2025

Jobs for america's graduates (jag) is a 43-year-old, state-based national non-profit serving young people who face significant academic, economic and social challenges so they graduate from high school and successfully transition to post-secondary education and/or meaningful employment. Jag has served over 1.5 million students since its inception and is currently helping 75,000 young people annually in nearly 1,500 communities and other locations in 39 states to achieve academic, career and life success.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80.5%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 71.2%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.31 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 59.6%; rating input score 60; 22nd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • 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%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 80.5% of revenue deployed · 71.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $321K · 34 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.5M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.