Health Systems Facilities Inc.

“The organization has a sole member, community health systems, inc., a nonprofit georgia corporation.”

“Under the organization's bylaws, while it is the sole member of the organization, community health systems, inc., as a type i section 509(a)(3) and section 501(c)(3) supporting organization, has the sole right to elect, replace and to remove the members of the organization's board of directors and shall ensure that at all times, a majority of the members of the organization's board of directors and shall ensure that at all times, a majority of the members of the organization's board of directors shall be composed of persons who are concurrently serving as members of the board of directors of community health systems, inc.”

“This process involves the electronic posting of the draft form 990 with all its schedules for the organization's board of directors to review followed, after a sufficient review period, by a meeting of the board at which board members will have the opportunity to ask questions of management and the outside tax advisors involved in the preparation of the form 990.”

“The organization regularly and consistently monitors and enforces compliance with its conflicts of interest policy. Such compliance is effectuated through the organization's board of directors' review of annual conflict disclosure statements from the directors as well as receipt and review of conflict disclosure statements with respect to certain proposed transactions or arrangements the organization is considering prior to any board action with respect to such matters. The conflicts policy outlines the specific procedure to be followed to determine whether interested persons have actual conflicts of interest. If it is determined that a board member has an actual conflict of interest, then such board member is not allowed to participate in the board deliberations on the specific matter and is excused from, and is not allowed to participate in any board vote on the matter.”

“The organization regularly and consistently complies with the compensation approval process which is part of its conflicts of interest policy. Every two to three years, on average, the organization participates in a comprehensive process conducted on its behalf by the compensation committee of the board of directors of community health systems, inc., its sole member and parent of the integrated health care delivery system in which the organization is a member. This process involves review of comparability data compiled by an independent third-party compensation consultant. Comparability data is gathered for the organization's senior management, and on occasion, key or highly compensated employees, and, based on the same, the consultant issues a written report reflecting the consultant's opinion concerning whether the proposed compensation arrangements constitute reasonable compensation under section 4958 of the code. This process is conducted by the compensation committee, which then makes recommendations to the board of directors. The board of directors is also provided with materials regarding the compensation review, including copies of the consultant's report. The board then votes as to the reasonableness of each of the individual compensation arrangements (if any disqualified or otherwise conflicted individuals are present at the meeting, they do not participate in the deliberations and are excused from the room during the vote). The process is designed and carried out by the board of directors in a manner designed to satisfy all three of the requirements necessary to establish the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness with respect to compensation arrangements for disqualified persons under section 53.4958-6 of the regulations. As part of this process, outside counsel is retained further to advise the board on the rebuttable presumption process and to provide the board with a legal opinion regarding the same. As a final step, each part of the process required to establish the rebuttable presumption is documented using the rebuttable presumption checklist released by the irs.”

“The organization regularly and consistently complies with the compensation approval process which is part of its conflicts of interest policy. Every two to three years, on average, the organization participates in a comprehensive process conducted on its behalf by the compensation committee of the board of directors of community health systems, inc., its sole member and parent of the integrated health care delivery system in which the organization is a member. This process involves review of comparability data compiled by an indepedent third-party compensation consultant. Comparability data is gathered for the organization's senior management, and on occasion, key or highly compensated employees, and, based on the same, the consultant issues a written report reflecting the consultant's opinion concerning whether the proposed compensation arrangements constitute reasonable compensation under section 4958 of the code. This process is conducted by the compensation committee, which then makes recommendations to the board of directors. The board of directors is also provided with materials regarding the compensation review, including copies of the consultant's report. The board then votes as to the reasonableness of each of the individual compensation arrangements (if any disqualified or otherwise conflicted individuals are present at the meeting, they do not participate in the deliberations and are excused from the room during the vote). The process is designed and carried out by the board of directors in a manner designed to satisfy all three of the requirements necessary to establish the rebuttable presumption of reasonableness with respect to compensation arrangements for disqualified persons under section 53.4958-6 of the regulations. As part of this process, outside counsel is retained to further advise the board on the rebuttable presumption process and to provide the board with a legal opinion regarding the same. As a final step, each part of the process required to establish the rebuttable presumption is documented using the rebuttable presumption checklist released by the irs.”

“The organization's governing documents, conflict of interest policy and financial statements are available for public inspection upon request in accordance with the section 6104(d) disclosure requirements.”

“Amended return in order to include corrected independent contractors who received in excess of 100,000. See part vii, section b for amended information.”

“Contribution of net assets 1,411,800”