Liberty County Hospital & Nursing Home
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 810515463
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Kalispell, MT, USA
- Phone
- 4607515759
- Rating
- 74
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Hospital, General
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $12,202,946
- Expenses
- $11,642,081
- Assets
- $18,073,291
- Liabilities
- $5,987,619
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CRAIG LAMBRECHT MD (SYSTEM CEO (UNTIL 3/11/2024))
- CHERIE TAYLOR (PRESIDENT, LOGAN HEALTH-CUT BANK)
- KEVIN ABEL (CEO)
- CLINTON SEGER MD (SYSTEM CO-CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- COLE TURNER (SYSTEM CFO (UNTIL 4/26/2024)): $1,953,756 total reported compensation
- CRAIG LAMBRECHT MD (SYSTEM CEO (UNTIL 3/11/2024)): $1,740,052 total reported compensation
- CLINTON SEGER MD (SYSTEM CO-CEO): $1,206,892 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our 25-bed critical access hospital, 18-bed assisted living facility, and rural health clinic provide inpatient and outpatient care to residents in liberty county and the surrounding area.
What it reported doing in 2024
Logan health-chester provided healthcare in the form of hospital in-patient days, emergency room visits, hospital outpatient visits, surgeries, assisted living days, long-term swing bed days, observation visits, clinic visits, etc.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 47
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 93.1%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 14th 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: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4.6%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.55; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.4%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 93.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $2M · 22 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 26 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.