Temple Health
Legal name: Temple University Health System Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 232825881
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Philadelphia, PA, US
- Phone
- 800-836-7536
- Rating
- 53
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $312,795,840
- Expenses
- $304,864,653
- Assets
- $684,579,611
- Liabilities
- $637,668,533
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
37 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Michael Young (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Michael Young (President & CEO): $2,136,271 total reported compensation
- Amy Goldberg (Director): $1,215,526 total reported compensation
- Gerald Oetzel (Treasurer): $951,697 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to provide access to high quality health care to the community and academic setting.
What it reported doing in 2024
Pursuant to its Articles of Incorporation, Temple University Health System (TUHS) serves as the sole member of the corporate Affiliates that own and operate hospitals and other health care service providers. Through its Affiliates, TUHS: (1) provides access to sites and programs for clinical training for the Temple University School of Medicine (TUSM) and otherwise supports the academic mission of TUSM; (2) provides access to medical and surgical aid to sick and disabled persons without regard to race, creed, color, sex, or national origin; and (3) supports such educational, philanthropic, and scientific (including research) activities as are part of an efficient modern health care system as part of an academic medical center.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 4
- Transparency & Controls: 96
- Accountability: 85
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 4.3%; rating input score 4
- Program expense ratio: 4.7%; rating input score 5
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 24th 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: 2.5%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.25; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.6%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 4.3% of revenue deployed · 4.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 20 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $14.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $2.1M · 37 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $13.5M reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 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: 19 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 18 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 4/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.