Samaritan Health Services
Legal name: Albany General Hospital
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 930110095
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Corvallis, OR, USA
- Phone
- 541-768-5765
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Hospitals
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $258,383,633
- Expenses
- $264,382,836
- Assets
- $80,681,056
- Liabilities
- $25,357,736
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DANIEL KETERI (BRD SEC & TREAS / CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JAMES RYAN MD (MEDICAL DIRECTOR): $808,402 total reported compensation
- DANIEL SMITH (SVP / CFO): $688,921 total reported compensation
- SHANE GJESDAL MD (PHYSICIAN): $688,709 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 build healthier communities together.
What it reported doing in 2024
Program services: albany general hospital (agh) is a 79-bed acute care facility and health center providing medical services to the greater albany area. Agh has more than 1,000 employees and volunteers serving the medical needs of the community. During 2024, agh served 2,134 inpatients, had 25,755 emergency department visits, performed 4,368 surgeries and delivered 394 babies. In addition, agh performed 87,624 imaging procedures, and had 159,084 physician clinic visits.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 99% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 87
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 71
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.4%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 89.2%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: 86.6%; rating input score 87; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -2.3%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.31; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.1%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 91.4% of revenue deployed · 89.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $235.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $808K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 30 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: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 53/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.