Azhima
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 860341667
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2021, Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Salina, KS, USA
- Phone
- 7852213146
- Rating
- 37
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $94,623
- Expenses
- $93,358
- Assets
- $249,659
- Liabilities
- $2,272
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- PAMELA HESS (PAST PRESIDENT UNTIL 6-2025)
- KATHERINE ANDERSEN (ADVOCACY DIR / PRESIDENT ELECT)
- HEATHER GUSCOTT (PRESIDENT / PAST PRESIDENT)
- JAMI WOEBKENBERG (PRESIDENT-ELECT / PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- STEPHANIE DEMOS (DELEGATE)
- GWYN PAINTER (DELEGATE AS OF 7-2025)
- CANDICE GARROD (DELEGATE UNTIL 6-2025)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
As the state membership organization of health information management professionals, the Arizona health information management association (azhima) fosters the professional development of its members through continuing education opportunities, by promoting quality clinical data management, and, by acting as an advocate on issues which will affect the management of health information.
What it reported doing in 2025
Send delegates to national and regional meetings in addition to educational seminars to improve skills.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 67% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 1
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 2%; rating input score 2
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.3%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.67; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 2% of revenue deployed
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 2/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.