St Luke Community Healthcare Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
810539096
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ronan, MT, USA
Phone
4066764441
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$306,559
Expenses
$275,051
Assets
$4,088,753
Liabilities
$10,321

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEVE TODD (CEO)
  • TAMARA CAMPBELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVE TODD (CEO): $396,094 total reported compensation
  • JOEL ONSAGER (CFO): $144,642 total reported compensation
  • TAMARA CAMPBELL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $4,615 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The foundation is dedicated to improving the care and comfort of patients at st. Luke community hospital.

What it reported doing in 2024

The st. Luke community healthcare foundation was created to help meet the needs of patients, employees and members of the community. Through annual gifts, endowment assets and funding of major facilities, technologies and programs, the foundation and the community members who support it help ensure st. Luke community healthcare continued leadership in health care.each year the foundation works with donors to raise and invest funds that help st. Luke community healthcare: maintain healthcare excellence by bridging the financial gap between the increasing cost of providing services and the shrinking level of reimbursement from medicare, medicaid and private insurance; purchase new equipment and make other non-reimbursable capital investments that allow st. Luke community healthcare to provide patients with the latest and most technologically advanced care; provide access to excellent healthcare to a culturally and economically diverse community; form partnerships with other organizations to support community wide health imporevement efforts; and engage in valuable, non reimbursable medical activities, such as physician/staff training and patient/community education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 98% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.3%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 89.5%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.3%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 14.87; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95.3% of revenue deployed · 89.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $246K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $396K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.