Aurora Health Care

Legal name: Aurora Health Care Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391442285
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Milwaukee, WI, US
Phone
833-528-7672
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Health Systems

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$184,565,208
Expenses
$308,142,853
Assets
$-413,742,609
Liabilities
$1,884,886,842

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

Leadership & pay

41 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GABRIELLE FINLEY-HAZLE (DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT)
  • DENNIS POTTS (DIRECTOR, VICE PRESIDENT)
  • NAN NELSON (DIRECTOR, VICE PRESIDENT)
  • WILLIAM SANTULLI (PRESIDENT)
  • JEFFREY BAHR (VICE PRESIDENT, ASSISTANT SECRETARY)
  • JEFFREY DALEN-BARD (PRESIDENT NORTH WI PSA)

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM SANTULLI (PRESIDENT): $7,866,221 total reported compensation
  • DOMINIC NAKIS (FORMER OFFICER): $4,607,851 total reported compensation
  • ANTHONY DEFURIO (FORMER OFFICER): $4,324,005 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 purpose is to redefine care

What it reported doing in 2024

Aurora health care, inc. And its affiliates (aurora) constitute an integrated health care system providing health care services to communities throughout eastern Wisconsin, northern Illinois, and the upper peninsula of Michigan. Aurora provides a variety of health care related activities, education, philanthropic, medical research and other benefits to the communities in which they operate. Health care services include primary and specialty care, pharmacies, behavioral health care, emergency care, rehabilitation, home care, and end-of-life care.aurora health care, inc. (the corporation) is a Wisconsin nonstock, not-for-profit corporation. The corporation is the parent corporation of a group of nonprofit and for profit corporations and other organizations that own and operate 14 acute-care hospital campuses, one psychiatric hospital, a network of approximately 158 physician clinic facilities, home health agency, approximately 71 retail pharmacies, and other health care and related service organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 31
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 5
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.6%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 23.6%; rating input score 24
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 24th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -67%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: -1.34; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.8% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 41.6% of revenue deployed · 23.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $72.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $7.9M · 41 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $11.4M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 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: 28 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 34 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.