Arizona Council of Human Service Providers
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 860549096
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 6022529363
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $999,380
- Expenses
- $1,123,611
- Assets
- $774,999
- Liabilities
- $42,486
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CANDY ESPINO (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- CANDY ESPINO (PRESIDENT & CEO): $168,600 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The most effective work provided by the Arizona Council for its members is the work with the state agencies. The Arizona Council staff work closely with state agency staff to resolve issues and find solutions that improve systems and services. Members of the Arizona Council serve on task force and work groups to develop position papers and bring their insight to find solutions to problems. See Schedule O for details.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Az Council engages in public policy advocacy at the state and national level on behalf of its member agencies. To impact legislation, most of the effort is on grass roots lobbying. There is some limited direct lobbying. Over 80% of the lobbying or advocacy effort is directed at the regulatory process, not at legislation. The members of the Council provide publicly funded behavioral health and child welfare services. They are heavily impacted by regulations and policies enacted by state agencies. That is the primary focus of the Councils advocacy effort by staff and independent contractors. Staff of the Council and of member agencies and independent contractors serve on work groups and committees and meet regularly with the staff of the Arizona Department of Health Services, Department of Child Safety, the Department of Economic Services and Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS). See Schedule O for details.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 64
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.5%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -12.4%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 15%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.5% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 16 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $169K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.