Last Prisoner Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
834502829
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
6039133579
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Inmate Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,266,193
Expenses
$2,738,267
Assets
$1,273,448
Liabilities
$8,965

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • SARAH GERSTEN (EXECUTIVE DIRECT): $186,012 total reported compensation
  • MARY BAILEY (MANAGING DIRECTOR): $119,555 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The last prisoner project (lpp) is a national, nonpartisan nonprofit organization dedicated to cannabis criminal justice reform. We aim to end america's policy of cannabis criminalization, as well as to repair the harms of this discriminatory and counterproductive crusade. We accomplish this by focusing on three critical criminal justice reform initiatives: release, record clearance, and reentry support. Beyond release, record clearance, and reentry, we also work to get our incarcerated constituents access to resources like food, healthcare, and phone calls by helping to fund their commissary accounts.

What it reported doing in 2024

Reentry and support: our reentry resources focus on ensuring that our constituents have the tools and support they need when coming home from incarceration. This includes financial support for housing, transportation, medical needs, employability skills and training, and financial wellness counseling. To that end, every year, lpp disperses direct microgrants to system-impacted constituents. Furthermore, our family support fund allocates a portion of lpp's funding directly to the children of our constituents to help them access educational resources while their parent is incarcerated.our advocacy campaigns use the faces and stories of individuals negatively impacted by cannabis prohibition and other misguided drug policies to help to change the narrative about these issues. We also produce reports, commentary, and shareable content that explore the sordid history behind-and devastating impact of-our drug nation's "war on drugs." this research is often leveraged to assist advocates, academics, and policymakers as they work to end the criminalization of cannabis and effectuate other drug policy reforms.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - 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: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 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: -20.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.2%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 30.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 6 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, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.