The Summit Medical Fitness Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203752312
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Kalispell, MT, USA
Phone
4067515759
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,421,904
Expenses
$6,582,179
Assets
$6,330,320
Liabilities
$5,090,900

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN ABEL (CEO)
  • CRAIG LAMBRECHT (SYSTEM CEO (UNTIL 3/11/2024))
  • CLINTON SEGEL MD (SYSTEM CO-CEO)
  • BRAD ROY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR THE SUMMIT MEDICAL FITNESS CENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • COLE TURNER (SYSTEM CFO (UNTIL 4/26/2024)): $1,953,756 total reported compensation
  • CRAIG LAMBRECHT (SYSTEM CEO (UNTIL 3/11/2024)): $1,740,052 total reported compensation
  • CLINTON SEGEL 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

The logan heath medical fitness center is a comprehensive fitness and wellness facility, serving the health and wellness needs of flathead county.

What it reported doing in 2024

Promotes community health and safety through community activities and school-based programs, including educational seminars, health screenings, safety activities, therapeutic lifestyle programs, and athletic physicals and training activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.5%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 13th 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: -21.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.8; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2M · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes 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: 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.