Chinook Enterprises
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 911100744
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Mount Vernon, WA, USA
- Phone
- 3604280140
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Sheltered Employment
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $3,005,716
- Expenses
- $2,993,370
- Assets
- $4,576,829
- Liabilities
- $616,731
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NICOLETTE WEGNER (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- NICOLETTE WEGNER (CEO): $185,689 total reported compensation
- LUCIANA ROCHA ALATORRE (CONTROLLER): $139,811 total reported compensation
- TOAI PHAM (FINANCE MANAGER): $137,157 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 mission of chinook enterprises is to support full participation in community life for people with disabilities or other barriers.
What it reported doing in 2025
Community employment services deliver chinook enterprises' mission-related work to the skagit valley community and beyond. Services include preparing students for employment opportunities, researching and securing employment opportunities, training and helping individuals to maintain employment opportunities and grow professionally. Community inclusion services are also extended to those seeking retirement or various community connections. We typically maintain 13-15 full-time employment service staff who provide 70% or higher direct service hours to customers in a given month. Annually, services are offered to 230-250 customers and over 100 local businesses.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 87% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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 - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 46
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 52.3%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 49.6%; rating input score 50
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 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: 0.4%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15.5%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -11.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 52.3% of revenue deployed · 49.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 16 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.