Lucky Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831995894
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Park City, UT, USA
Phone
8165550564
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Developmentally Disabled Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$498,844
Expenses
$442,017
Assets
$202,953
Liabilities
$98,329

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kathryn Manhart (Vice President)
  • Taylor Matkins (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kathryn Manhart (Vice President): $40,070 total reported compensation
  • Taylor Matkins (President): $27,242 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Lucky Project's mission is to show the world the value of individuals with disabilities who are developing the fundamentals to help create full meaningful lives.

What it reported doing in 2025

We are providing hands-on training to individuals with disabilities, covering various aspects of coffee shop operations, including customer service, cash handling, food preparation, and inventory management. The coffee shop served as a community hub, fostering social inclusion and raising awareness about the capabilities of individuals with disabilities. The revenue generated from the coffee shop operations is reinvested into our programs, allowing us to expand our services and reach more individuals in need. In all the program leads to the creation of a meaningful life for those who otherwise would not have an opportunity because of their disabilities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.1%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 78%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.4%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.48; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.2%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.1% of revenue deployed · 78% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $345K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.