Tri-Cities Chaplaincy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910913590
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Richland, WA, USA
Phone
(509) 783-7416
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospices

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,554,179
Expenses
$14,319,220
Assets
$12,873,147
Liabilities
$1,042,217

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAUREL JACKSON (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAUREL JACKSON (CEO): $315,311 total reported compensation
  • MEISKE MILLWARD (CNO): $179,066 total reported compensation
  • Kyla Frasco (CFO): $175,754 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To guide our community members to live their best lives, even and especially through the end of life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Chaplain services - professional chaplains connect body, mind and spirit, especially when under stress. Our team of professional chaplains provide spiritual care services to hospitals, correctional institutions, hospice, and the community at large. Chaplains offer emotional and spiritual support though distressing times to guide people toward peace, understanding, recovery, and dignified dying . Our chaplains represent a wide range of denominations and care for those in crisis regardless of their religious affiliation (or lack thereof). They prioritize and promote the spritual and existential resources of the individual.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 80%; rating input score 80
  • Program expense ratio: 65.3%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -23.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.9; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 5 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 80% of revenue deployed · 65.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $9.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $315K · 23 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 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 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.