Health Access Network Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113650708
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Lincoln, ME, USA
Phone
2077946700
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ambulatory Health Center, Community Clinic

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,431,801
Expenses
$13,330,742
Assets
$14,105,913
Liabilities
$4,018,710

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Harold Cote (President)
  • Addison Goslin (Vice President)
  • Nicole Glidden RN (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Katie Adams (Medical Director & Physician): $353,620 total reported compensation
  • Jessica House (Physician): $327,705 total reported compensation
  • Deva Gundupalli (Physician): $293,984 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We will make a difference in the lives of our patients and community by providing compassionate, high quality healthcare services focusing on the whole person, without financial or social discrimination.

What it reported doing in 2025

Health Access Network (HAN) is a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) that began operations in 2003 and now has clinic locations in the rural communities of Lincoln, Medway, Millinocket, West Enfield, and Lee, Maine. HAN's service area includes 19 organized towns, plus numerous unorganized plantations and territories in northern central Maine with a total population of about 20,000 people. HAN provides comprehensive primary healthcare, dental care, walk-in care, and behavioral healthcare services to all residents, regardless of their ability to pay.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 69% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 57.2%; rating input score 57
  • Program expense ratio: 62.5%; rating input score 63
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 7.6%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.9%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 57.2% of revenue deployed · 62.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $8.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $354K · 19 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $326K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.