Hendrick Provider Network

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752660403
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Sherman, TX, US
Phone
1-855-215-5555
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ambulatory Health Center, Community Clinic

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$70,836,202
Expenses
$141,411,699
Assets
$18,425,967
Liabilities
$19,697,107

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Brad Holland (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • Jeremy Walker (VICE PRESIDENT/CFO)
  • Kirk Canada (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • Rob Wiley (Vice President)
  • David Stephenson (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • Michael Blanc (Physician): $2,279,144 total reported compensation
  • Brent Mahoney (DIRECTOR): $2,179,990 total reported compensation
  • Antao Du (Physician): $1,940,771 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide medical care to the communities of abilene and brownwood. Many patients are on medicaid. Services are provided regardless of ability to pay.

What it reported doing in 2024

Hendrick provider network provides a variety of health services across a wide range of specialties for patients in the abilene and brownwood areas, many of whom are uninsured or are on medicaid. These services are provided by physicians employed by the company.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 2
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -99.6%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.13; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.07; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $124.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2.3M · 25 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 21 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.