University of Alabama Health Services Foundation Pc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
630649108
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Birmingham, AL, USA
Phone
2057319600
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,240,858,872
Expenses
$1,199,939,898
Assets
$1,171,473,304
Liabilities
$606,456,332

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

Leadership & pay

38 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAWN BULGARELLA (CEO, UAB HEALTH SYSTEM)
  • CHERI CANON MD (PRESIDENT)
  • RAY WATTS (FORMER PRESIDENT/BOARD MEMBER)
  • JASON DANIEL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KEITH JONES (FORMER PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES E DAVIES (PROFESSOR/physician): $3,574,688 total reported compensation
  • DAWN BULGARELLA (CEO, UAB HEALTH SYSTEM): $2,764,739 total reported compensation
  • MUSTAFA I AHMED (physician): $2,718,369 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Coordinate and deliver patient care in a group practice setting within the academic environment of the university of Alabama at birmingham.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operation of a nonprofit physician group practice closely affiliated with the university of Alabama at birmingham. Hsf consists of over 1,422 faculty physicians and fellows offering services in 33 specialties. These services are reinforced by the research and educational programs of uab's academic health center, resulting in state-of-the-art care.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 85.1%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 52.4%; rating input score 52; 14th 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: 3.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.52; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.7% of revenue deployed · 85.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 21 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1B in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3.6M · 38 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $12.7M reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 30 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.