Ochsner Health

Legal name: Lafayette General Health System Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
383646817
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Lafayette, LA, USA
Phone
504-842-3000
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Health Systems

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$301,428,641
Expenses
$293,201,330
Assets
$1,173,185,797
Liabilities
$752,739,751

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PATRICK W GANDY (EVP,CEO LGHS, PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PETE NOVEMBER (TRUSTEE (END 3/2024)): $7,011,513 total reported compensation
  • ROBERT HART MD (TRUSTEE): $4,738,566 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL HULEFELD (TRUSTEE): $4,206,018 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 serve, heal, lead, educate and innovate.

What it reported doing in 2024

Lafayette general health system, inc. The parent entity of lafayette general medical center, inc., st. Martin hospital, inc., university hospital and clinics, acadia general hospital, lafayette health ventures, inc., lafayette general foundation, and kaplan general hospital provided support of the missions of these 501(c)(3) organizations and thier related organizations during the year. These hospitals provide needed medical care to the community. The health systems also provides management support for these organizations. The revenue recorded is the organizations share of its subsidiaries' earnins for the year, as well as management fees paid by the other organization to the health system.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 73% 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 most filed governance safeguards are in place. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 80
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 58.9%; rating input score 59; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 65%; rating input score 65; 18th 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: 2.7%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.9%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 83.3% of revenue deployed · 84.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 20 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $248M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $7M · 33 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 64 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.