The National Right to Work Committee

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510147724
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Springfield, VA, USA
Phone
7033219820
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,449,003
Expenses
$10,159,884
Assets
$21,484,148
Liabilities
$1,412,405

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK A MIX (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MATTHEW M LEEN (VP): $384,505 total reported compensation
  • MARK A MIX (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT): $347,902 total reported compensation
  • JOHN A KALB (VP/SECRETARY): $204,618 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 committee is a nonprofit, tax-exempt, educational-lobbying organization opposing compulsory unionism in all its forms and supporting the right of all people to obtain and hold a job without being forced to join a labor union or pay compulsory union dues. The committee supports the protection and enactment of state right to work laws until the federal sanction for compulsory unionism is eliminated.

What it reported doing in 2025

The committee conducts an educational-lobbying program on a state and national level to oppose compulsory unionism. Among other objectives, the committee strives to protect existing state right to work laws and the federal employees' right to work law, as well as to encourage other states and the federal government to adopt right to work laws protecting all workers affected by compulsory unionism. Its ultimate goal is to eliminate compulsory unionism. As of 2025, 26 states have adopted right to work laws.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 85% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 70.8%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd 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: 2.8%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.11; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 76% of revenue deployed · 70.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $7.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $385K · 24 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.9M reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 11/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.