Deaconess Health System
Legal name: Deaconess Women's Hospital of Southern Indiana Llc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 352062016
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Evansville, IN, US
- Phone
- 812-450-5000
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $153,702,311
- Expenses
- $132,577,207
- Assets
- $292,566,666
- Liabilities
- $33,898,709
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SHAWN MCCOY (CEO OF DEACONESS HOSPITAL)
- JAMES PORTER MD (PRESIDENT OF DEACONESS HOSPITAL)
- CHRISTINA M RYAN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
Highest reported compensation
- SHAWN MCCOY (CEO OF DEACONESS HOSPITAL): $2,377,687 total reported compensation
- SAMER SCHUMAN MD (PHYSICIAN): $1,769,078 total reported compensation
- JAMES PORTER MD (PRESIDENT OF DEACONESS HOSPITAL): $1,260,538 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 provide exceptional healthcare services, putting people at the center of everything we do, making a positive difference in the lives of patients, families, employees, and the community.
What it reported doing in 2024
The women's hospital is dedicated to the specific health care needs of women and babies. Our team of highly-skilled physicians and staff members is committed to providing compassionate, high-quality care in a family-centered environment.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 99% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 63
- Accountability: 32
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 76.5%; rating input score 76
- Program expense ratio: 88.7%; rating input score 89
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 8th 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: 74.8%; rating input score 75; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th 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: 13.7%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.21; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.2%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 7 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 76.5% of revenue deployed · 88.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $117.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $2.4M · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $9.8M reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 39 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.