Flaget Health Care Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 611345363
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 5023505000
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $117,718,175
- Expenses
- $91,418,218
- Assets
- $87,058,537
- Liabilities
- $13,224,809
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
29 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- T DOUGLAS LAWSON (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT SOUTH REGION (THRU 2/2025))
- MATT GRIMSHAW (DIRECTOR/MARKET PRESIDENT (BEG 12/24))
- JENNIFER NOLAN (PRESIDENT FLAGET)
Highest reported compensation
- T DOUGLAS LAWSON (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT SOUTH REGION (THRU 2/2025)): $3,876,407 total reported compensation
- MATT GRIMSHAW (DIRECTOR/MARKET PRESIDENT (BEG 12/24)): $954,065 total reported compensation
- SHARON HAGER (FORMER OFFICER): $867,630 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
"as an affiliate of commonspirit health, we make the healing presence of god known in our world by improving the health of the people we serve, especially those who are vulnerable, while we advance social justice for all".
What it reported doing in 2024
See schedule h.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 98% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 61
- Accountability: 78
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65.5%; rating input score 66
- Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Fail
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 86.4%; rating input score 86; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 22.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 65.5% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 13 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $77.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $3.9M · 29 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.9M reported
- Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 332 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.