Glacier Meadow Lodge Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
651176646
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Kalispell, MT, USA
Phone
4062575173
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$231,328
Expenses
$138,438
Assets
$846,858
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Dean Landis (Director): $16,587 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Youth Camping Program on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation involves Bible training Discipleship and Out-Door Education.

What it reported doing in 2025

Construction Development of Land - In 2025 we began development of land purchased in PY including addition of buildings and land improvements.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.9%; rating input score 53
  • Program expense ratio: 88.4%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Limited
    • 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: 40.2%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.12; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -111% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 43.5% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.9% of revenue deployed · 88.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $122K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $17K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 40 current checks pass · 6 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 53/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesManagement column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.