Phoebe Putney Health System

Legal name: Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
581928247
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Albany, GA, US
Phone
(229) 312-1000
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$914,268,790
Expenses
$842,619,973
Assets
$976,518,342
Liabilities
$545,328,826

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT STEINER (PPHS CEO/PRE)
  • DEBORAH ANGERAMI (PPMH CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • SCOTT STEINER (PPHS CEO/PRE): $2,238,940 total reported compensation
  • BRIAN CHURCH (PPHS CFO/CAO): $1,473,567 total reported compensation
  • JAMES E BLACK MD (BOARD MEMBER): $1,087,149 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Making lives better. Together.

What it reported doing in 2024

Phoebe putney memorial hospital is a not-for-profit hospital with 691 licensed beds and had patient days of 117,135 in the current year. Intensive care, neonatal intensive care, nursery, rehab, and psychiatry services are included in the services provided. The hospital also operates a home health agency and a 18 bed hospice. Other: 18,015 inpatient admissions, 1,902 births, 66,561 emergency visits, and 785,391 clinic visits. See schedule h, part vi, additional information, which includes detailed discussions on all charitable and community activities of the hospital.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% 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 a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 62
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.8%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 80.6%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 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: 7.8%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.4%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 11 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 73.8% of revenue deployed · 80.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $679.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2.2M · 24 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $43.3M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.