Tri-county Good Samaritan Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
460395733
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Redfield, SD, USA
Phone
6054723314
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$142,209
Expenses
$123,006
Assets
$211,810
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Pastor Adrian Timmons (Board President)
  • Dale Fiedler (Board Vice-President)

People named in this filing

  • Pastor Adrian Timmons (Board President)
  • Dale Fiedler (Board Vice-President)
  • Marsha Solheim (Board Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Operate a relief agency for people who need help.

What it reported doing in 2025

Operate a Thrift Store with donated clothing & household items sold at rummage sale prices, most priced $2 or less. Grants is est. value of items given to Salvation Army, Goodwill, or local Hutterite Colony for rags, or to make rugs. Grant amt. is included in Line 1. We served 4,322 people. Nothing is purchased for resale.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 91% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.2%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 68.8%; rating input score 69

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.5%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.72; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.8%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.4% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.2% of revenue deployed · 68.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $85K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.