Arizona Behavioral Health Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
860888064
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Phoenix, AZ, US
Phone
602-712-9200
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$62,009,179
Expenses
$61,222,049
Assets
$24,155,117
Liabilities
$5,219,685

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES SULLIVAN (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLES SULLIVAN (PRESIDENT/CEO): $228,749 total reported compensation
  • JENNY MCLELLAN (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $169,998 total reported compensation
  • FRED ATKINS (CFO): $169,351 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide housing and supportive services to individuals with serious mental illness and co-occurring disorders, promoting stability and independence.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ahcccs housing program: Arizona behavioral health corporation serve asthe centralized housing administrator for the ahcccs housing programthroughout the state of Arizona.abc provides quality, affordable, and supportive housing for personswith behavioral health needs in Arizona. Since 1999, abc has providedhousing to tens of thousands of ahcccs members with a focus onhigh-quality housing program administration.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.5%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 80%; rating input score 80; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 95.5% of revenue deployed · 96.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $59M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $229K · 17 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.