St. Luke's
Legal name: St Luke's Hospital Anderson Campus
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 454394739
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2012
- Location
- Allentown, PA, USA
- Phone
- 484-526-9054
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Hospitals and Related Primary Medical Care Facilities
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $596,693,813
- Expenses
- $507,160,993
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
19 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Richard A Anderson (Trustee - President/CEO-SLUHN)
- Edward R Nawrocki (President - SL Anderson Campus)
Highest reported compensation
- Justin P Psaila MD (VP Medical Affairs): $737,575 total reported compensation
- Darla R Frack (VP Patient Care Svcs): $397,530 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
St. Luke’s University Health Network (SLUHN) is a non-profit, regional, fully integrated, nationally recognized network providing services at 16 campuses and more than 350 sites in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. If revenues exceed expenses resulting in a financial surplus, 100 percent is retained and reinvested back into the organization to support our mission in the form of physical assets, programs and services for the communities we serve. Why does St. Luke's need philanthropic support? Luke’s has relied on philanthropic support to become a leader in health care. Luke’s continues to make significant investments in facilities, technology and medical services, in order to serve patients, including those patients who require financial assistance. Facility replacement and enhancement projects are being implemented at St. Luke’s locations in carefully planned stages with the...
What it reported doing in 2024
Expenses incurred in providing emergency and medically necessary healthcare services to all individuals in a non-discriminatory manner regardless of race, color, creed, sex, national origin or ability to pay. Please refer to schedule o for the organization's community benefit statement (statement of program services) which includes detailed information regarding the various services provided by this organization.
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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 87
- Accountability: 83
- Sustainability: 50
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 79.5%; rating input score 79
- Program expense ratio: 93.5%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 96.6%; rating input score 97; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 15%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 79.5% of revenue deployed · 93.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $474.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $738K · 19 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 29 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.