Without looking more closely at it, I’d say that by moving the functions that can tolerate running less often into a different chart (with a longer delay), you will get better average response time on the functions you want to run more often. That is true especially if the 1+ sec delay functions have complicated stuff in them (string manipulation, communication).
Here is another way to look at it. Lets say you have five charts, each with 5 functions, and each function takes the same amount of time to execute. With no delays (and ignoring the host task), you could expect all your functions to each get 1/25th of the processor.
Now, move 5 of those functions (one from each chart) into a new slow chart, looping once per second. Most of the time, your critical functions now get 1/20th of the processor, reducing their cycle time by 20%. Once per second, they only get 1/25th, no worse than they did before, even with the extra chart running.
One other minor point to add… if the overall loop timing isn’t too important, but you absolutely want Functions A, B, and C within a chart to execute sequentially as fast as possible, you could add a 1 ms delay before function A. That would force the chart to give up its time slice, so that when it gets its turn next, it has the whole 1 ms to get through A, B, and C. Without the delay there, the amount of time slice left when beginning A would be random, and it could run out before getting all the way through C, introducing a relatively long and maybe unpredictable delay into the critical function sequence.