Health First Foundation-northern Arizona
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 813137336
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Flagstaff, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 9282239239
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,923,367
- Expenses
- $1,419,994
- Assets
- $19,697,874
- Liabilities
- $563,094
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- SANDRA KOWALSKI (EXECUTIVE DI): $179,227 total reported compensation
- ANA CASTILLO (OPERATIONS D): $159,236 total reported compensation
- MARK URICK (EXECUTIVE DI): $21,071 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Innovation to advance health and well-being across northern Arizona's diverse population and geography. We inspire donors to support innovative community health initiatives of nonprofit organizations, hospitals, and medical centers. Our collaborations and investment alliances strive to bring health and well-being to the greatest number of people possible with maximum impact. We evaluate community health needs assessments to determine priority needs and use quantitative measurements to assess the sustainable impact health first funded programs have on health and well-being for all and promoting vibrant communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
The foundation funded sponsorships to build awareness of mental health diseases and conditions and to reduce the associated stigma. Health first awarded 550,000 in grants to eight non-profit organizations working to address community health issues. Total lives impacted through programs:113,763.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Investment-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.
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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 47
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 74
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 43.8%; rating input score 44
- Program expense ratio: 65.8%; rating input score 66
- Fundraising efficiency: $1.05 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 49th 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; 63rd 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: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 26.2%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.87; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 25.3%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -33.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 43.8% of revenue deployed · 65.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $934K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 11 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 19 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 16 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 44/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 3/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.