Pillar Network
Legal name: Pillar Church Planting Network
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 264014590
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Wake Forest, NC, United States
- Phone
- +1(919)435.8307
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Protestant
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,239,179
- Expenses
- $2,189,860
- Assets
- $1,039,578
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
People named in this filing
- JASON CHASTEEN (GENERATION L)
- TIM DALE (BOARD MEMBER)
- CLINT DARST (BOARD MEMBER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Provide support to like-minded (SBC / International Baptist) church planting and revitalization efforts through a community committed to equipping, planting, and revitalizing churches together. We believe in the universal church, a living spiritual body of which Christ is the head and all born-again persons are members. We believe local churches are the visible expression of the universal church on earth. The local church is an autonomous congregation of baptized believers operating under the Lordship of Jesus Christ. The congregation is to gather regularly to celebrate God-centered worship, to commit to the teachings of Scripture, to exercise its gifts for the work of service, and to enjoy a common fellowship and unity in Christ. Every church member has the responsibility to give faithfully of his time, abilities, and material possessions to support the mission and ministries of t.
What it reported doing in 2024
Provision of financial support to 30+ church plants during the 2020 calendar year
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 79% for direct work, and 21% for grants.
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 78.1%; rating input score 78
- Program expense ratio: 79.9%; rating input score 80
- Fundraising efficiency: $84.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 93.9%; rating input score 94; 29th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.2%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.6% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 78.1% of revenue deployed · 79.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 15 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 6 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.