The Good Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
872551276
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Westminster, CO, USA
Phone
3039936831
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$387,667
Expenses
$359,369
Assets
$51,023
Liabilities
$6,227

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Mary Hooper (Manager): $26,222 total reported compensation
  • Shaunessy Kieng (Director): $20,750 total reported compensation
  • Christine Dihle (Manager): $18,031 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Good Foundation exists to improve the health of vulnerable populations by creating sustainable livelihoods through economic empowerment. The Good Foundation operates businesses Global Thrift stores in the United States. That revenue then funds small businesses internationally among displaced people creating jobs and providing income. All revenue from business then pays operating costs and salaries and provides humanitarian aid to those in need in the areas where we work.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Good Foundation operates thrift stores in the United States generating revenue that funds medical efforts and supports small businesses internationally among displaced peoples. All revenue from business pays operating costs and salaries and provides humanitarian aid to those in need in the areas where we work.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 9
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 9.8%; rating input score 10
  • Program expense ratio: 10.6%; rating input score 11
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.3%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 39.6% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 9.8% of revenue deployed · 10.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $38K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $26K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 43 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 10/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.