Cabinet Peaks Medical Center Foundation

Legal name: St John's Lutheran Hospital Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810425832
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jul 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Libby, MT, US
Phone
406-293-0107
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$275,021
Expenses
$32,686
Assets
$2,843,116
Liabilities
$41,694

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Tony Rebo (President)
  • Frank Votapka (Vice President)
  • Tadd Greenfield (CPMC CEO)
  • Donna Nicely (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Tadd Greenfield (CPMC CEO): $355,408 total reported compensation
  • Kent Gustin (Director): $245,908 total reported compensation
  • Tony Rebo (President): $105,336 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To support the mission of Cabinet Peaks Medical Center by raising and managing funds for capital improvements, equipment, and community health programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Through the Foundation's Paint It Pink program, the Foundation will pay for uninsured individuals in our service area to received mammograms and breast ultrasounds, and also for the detection and treatment of breast cancer for the people of Lincoln County. In FY2025, $34,978 was raised for the program. As a note, no money is gifted to individuals who receive free mammograms, rather, the hospital bill is sent to the Foundation, and the Foundation pays the hospital directly for services rendered

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, and 49% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 23
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 10.4%; rating input score 10
  • Program expense ratio: 52.1%; rating input score 52
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th 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: 82.2%; rating input score 82; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 88.1%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 86.98; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 189.4%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 10.4% of revenue deployed · 52.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 14 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $17K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $355K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 10/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.