UF Health

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
591943502
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Gainesville, FL, USA
Phone
3522657962
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Hospital, General

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,996,505,492
Expenses
$2,823,929,864
Assets
$3,464,550,813
Liabilities
$1,391,275,432

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

Leadership & pay

48 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STEPHEN MOTEW MD (VICE CHAIR & DIR / UF HEALTH PRES & SYSTEM CEO)
  • W Kent Fuchs PhD (DIRECTOR / INTERIM PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA)
  • Michael Holmes (SVP and Greater Gainesville Regional President (Beg March 2025))
  • Heather Long (UF Health SVP and Central Florida Regional President)
  • James J Kelly Jr (Former INTERIM STHC CEO)
  • JUSTIN SENIOR (CEO Safety Net Hosp Alliance of FL)

Highest reported compensation

  • David Nelson MD (DIRECTOR (THRU APRIL 2025) / UF SVP HEALTH AFFAIRS): $1,666,139 total reported compensation
  • STEPHEN MOTEW MD (VICE CHAIR & DIR / UF HEALTH PRES & SYSTEM CEO): $1,608,122 total reported compensation
  • Jennifer Hunt MD (DIRECTOR/Interim Dean, UF College of Medicine): $1,070,160 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We promote health through outstanding and high-quality patient care, innovative and rigorous education in the health professions and biomedical sciences, and research across the spectrum of basic, translational and clinical investigation. Achieve new heights of excellence in your career with a renowned health system admired nationwide. Team with people who will respect and support you. Explore the practice areas where you belong. And be rewarded with the kind of benefits and opportunities that really matter day after day. Here at UF Health. Search Careers Visit Destination UF Health UF Health College of Medicine Campus aerial photo. Learn how we provide patients and their families with the highest level of quality medical care. Patient Experience Tobacco-Free Campus Patient and doctor laughing.

What it reported doing in 2024

Shands Teaching Hospitals and Clinics, Inc. (STHC), part of UF Health, provides a comprehensive range of services to support patient care, education, and community health in north central Florida. Its primary facility, UF Health Shands Hospital, is a 1,054-bed academic medical center offering advanced specialty care and serving as a major training site for University of Florida health professionals. Additional programs include UF Health Shands Psychiatric Hospital for behavioral health services, UF Health Ocala Neighborhood Hospital for community-based emergency and outpatient care, and UF Health Shands HomeCare for in-home services. STHC also operates the UF Health Florida Recovery Center for substance use treatment. Together, these programs provide a coordinated continuum of care and support UF Health's mission to advance health.

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 86% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82%; rating input score 82
  • Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd 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: 90.6%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 58.3%; rating input score 58; 16th 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: 5.8%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.5%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 82% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.5B in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.7M · 48 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $185.5M reported
  • Consistency: 39 of 41 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 13 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 31 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 54 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 58/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.