Hospital Authority committee recommends no discretionary bonus for former CEO after low evaluation scores

The CEO Performance Evaluation Committee of the Hospital Authority Board voted to recommend that the full board not award any discretionary bonus to former National General Hospital CEO Dr. Webb after assigning a committee score of 21 out of a possible 75 points.

The committee’s score, which corresponds to the lower third of the evaluation scale, was reached after members reviewed five performance categories including growth, financial leadership, quality, customer service and stakeholder relations. Committee members said the financial leadership category and failures identified in a recent Metro Government audit weighed heavily in their decision, and they noted persistent communication and culture problems under the former CEO’s tenure.

Why it matters: the committee formally recorded the recommendation for the full board and will summarize the decision at the next board meeting. Metro Legal informed the committee that Dr. Webb’s severance agreement may have already settled compensation matters, which would render any committee recommendation legally moot; the committee proceeded with the evaluation to document the process and reasoning.

Key findings and discussion - Overall score and bonus recommendation: The committee totaled 21 out of 75 points across the evaluation criteria. Under the board’s discretionary range (0–5 percent), committee members said that score corresponds to an expected bonus at or near 0–1 percent; the committee voted to recommend no discretionary bonus. - Financial leadership: Multiple committee members said financial oversight was a primary deficiency, citing audit findings and months in which revenues and expenses were “wildly off track.” Specific metrics mentioned as unmet included net 90‑day positive cash flow and reductions in accounts receivable aging. One member described the CEO’s absence from board discussions on the financial shortfalls as a significant concern. - Quality and operations: Members acknowledged positive measures such as recent Leapfrog results and Press Ganey scores (noted in discussion as 4.11 or greater), but several said basic facility and equipment issues (beds, lab equipment, call-button reliability) and staffing-level assessments remained incomplete and affected quality judgments. - Culture and communication: The committee recorded multiple comments that hospital culture and internal communication improved after the former CEO’s departure. Several members tied that change to deficiencies in the prior leadership’s communication and stakeholder engagement. - Cerner implementation and growth metrics: Committee members said Cerner implementation remains ongoing and that expected market‑penetration metrics (for example, patient growth at the referenced hospital campus) were not met during the evaluation period.

Formal action and votes - Approval of minutes: The committee approved minutes from the Feb. 25, 2025 meeting by motion; the record shows affirmative votes and the motion passed. - Recommendation to full board: The committee moved, seconded and voted to forward to the full board a recommendation not to award any discretionary bonus for the former CEO, noting the committee’s total score (21 of 75). The motion carried.

Next steps and follow-up The committee said it will present a brief summary of the evaluation and its recommendation at the next full-board meeting. Committee members also discussed the process for setting fiscal year 2026 CEO objectives and agreed to consult the interim CEO, Dr. Elders (formerly chief nursing officer), and finance staff (including a suggested conversation with Dr. Blackledge) to refine metrics before presenting recommended criteria to the full board. Committee planning referenced potential meeting dates in June and July to finalize the FY26 criteria; members acknowledged public-notice timing constraints for meetings held immediately before the full-board meeting.

Context and background Committee members repeatedly referenced a Metro Government audit that flagged issues with contract reporting to the board and said that audit informed the financial leadership ratings. The committee emphasized that documenting the evaluation — even if Metro Legal’s reading of the severance agreement limits downstream legal effect — is important for board accountability, to set expectations for future CEOs, and to provide transparency for staff and stakeholders.

The committee adjourned after completing the agenda and scheduling follow-up work on the FY26 CEO objectives.