The Shadow Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
651166066
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
Portland, OR, USA
Phone
9713733457
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,121,512
Expenses
$855,084
Assets
$892,676
Liabilities
$26,432

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEDEE WILNER-NUGENT (PRESIDENT (THROUGH 5/2025))
  • SHARON JUENEMANN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHARON JUENEMANN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $95,736 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 mission of the shadow project is to make school more accessible and engaging for children with disabilities, so they can achieve their full potential. Since 2003, the shadow project has supported over 20,000 students impacted by autism, adhd, (continued on sch o) dyslexia and other learning challenges to improve their reading skills, build self-confidence, and shatter myths about what people with disabilities are capable of. Students in the shadow project have gone on to become classroom leaders, reading champions, and the first in their family to graduate high school.

What it reported doing in 2024

The shadow project exists to make learning more accessible and engaging for children with disabilities, so they can achieve their full potential. We work with special education teachers and student support specialists in elementary schools and middle schools to strengthen skills, foster autonomy, and support the development of a positive self-identity for students with learning, attention, or behavioral challenges, especially dyslexia, adhd, autism and trauma. Since 2003, we have helped more than 20,000 capable students develop essential skills for school and life success, including goal-setting, perseverance, and emotional awareness. We serve students from diverse communities who face multiple complex barriers to success, including racism and ableism. (continued on sch o)we envision an education system that normalizes and celebrates learning differences and supports every student to thrive in school. Our organization provides evidence-based tools and strategies tailored to the needs of students with learning challenges. We support educators in integrating these resources into their curricula and building their skill sets for providing trauma-informed, neuroinclusive learning environments.recent accomplishments: with Oregon schools struggling to help students recover from disrupted learning during covid, shadow project programs helped 2,720 students at 69 schools to joyfully take ownership over their learning. Shadow project mentors provided 373 hours of support to students reading below grade level, fueling their confidence and engagement in school. Students received over 430 hours of sensory and body awareness support to help them identify and advocate for their regulation needs. Shadow project staff trained 157 educators in trauma-informed, neuroinclusive strategies to integrate sensory and social-emotional support into school routines. Students received over 25,400 books, sensory tools, and other educational materials. Teachers using our programs report the impact of these supports: 70% of students increased self-motivation; 65% of students improve their skills in managing emotions; 60% of students showed greater enthusiasm for reading.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.6%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 74.1%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.17 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 23.8%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.04; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.2%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.6% of revenue deployed · 74.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $634K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $96K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 27/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.