Washington Destination Imagination

Legal name: Washington Imagination Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911728778
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2013
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Richland, WA, US
Phone
3606751354
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Services, Organizations of Students

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$81,338
Expenses
$54,241
Assets
$79,988

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Susie Rogers (Board President)
  • Patsy Bryan (Board Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Barbara Sailors (Affiliate Director)
  • Jean Young (Regional Director)
  • Peg Bodin (Regional Director)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Washington Destination Imagination (WADI) facilitates the Destination Imagination (DI) program in WA state. Students work together to solve open-ended STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Math) Team Challenges designed to teach the creative process.

What it reported doing in 2013

Continuing Education Scholarships for two high school seniors

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.9%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 82.4%; rating input score 82

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.3%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.47; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45.5%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.3% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.9% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 54.9% of revenue deployed · 82.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $45K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2011 to 2013
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.