Ampla Health
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 942210447
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
- Location
- Yuba City, CA, US
- Phone
- (530) 674-4261
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $173,381,234
- Expenses
- $152,261,403
- Assets
- $145,959,371
- Liabilities
- $81,286,666
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Benjamin Flores (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Thiyagu Ganesan (MEDICAL DOCTOR): $671,248 total reported compensation
- Benjamin Flores (CEO): $645,058 total reported compensation
- Vijay Linga (MEDICAL DOCTOR): $578,374 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Ampla Health is a 501(c) 3 non-profit Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) governed by a volunteer Board of Directors in compliance with requirements set forth by 330 grants and by the agency’s by-laws. The board must include a majority (at least 51%) of active, registered clients of the health center who are representative of the populations served by the center. The governing board ensures the organization is community based and responsive to the community’s health care needs.
What it reported doing in 2024
Ampla health provides high quality medical, dental, social and educational health services that meet the unique needs of all patients especially those who are medically under served including farm workers and others without financial resources.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 91% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and liabilities are high compared with assets.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 64.5%; rating input score 64
- Program expense ratio: 73.3%; rating input score 73
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th 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: 12.2%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.96; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.5%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 15 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 6 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 64.5% of revenue deployed · 73.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $111.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $671K · 22 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.