YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT

WE URGE YOU TO VOTE USING TELEPHONE OR INTERNET VOTING, IF AVAILABLE TO YOU, OR IF YOU RECEIVED THESE PROXY MATERIALS BY MAIL, BY COMPLETING, SIGNING, DATING, AND RETURNING THE ENCLOSED PROXY CARD PROMPTLY. PLEASE NOTE THAT IF YOUR SHARES ARE HELD BY A BANK, BROKER, OR OTHER RECORDHOLDER AND YOU WISH TO VOTE THEM AT THE MEETING, YOU MUST OBTAIN A LEGAL PROXY FROM THAT RECORDHOLDER.

Our Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual Meeting”) will be held at our corporate offices located at 12400 High Bluff Drive, San Diego, California 92130 on Wednesday,

April 22, 2015, at 8:30 a.m. Pacific Daylight Time or at any subsequent time that may be necessary by any adjournment or postponement of the Annual Meeting.

We are making the proxy solicitation materials available to stockholders who hold shares in “street name” electronically via the Internet under the Notice and Access rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). On or about March 11, 2015, we will mail to such stockholders a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (“Notice”) in lieu of mailing a full set of proxy materials. Accordingly, our proxy materials are first being made available to our stockholders on or about March 11, 2015. The Notice includes information on how to access and review the proxy materials, and how to vote, via the Internet. All stockholders will have the ability to access the proxy materials on the website referred to in the Notice or request a printed set of the proxy materials. Instructions on how to access the proxy

materials over the Internet or to request a printed copy may be found in the Notice. In addition, stockholders may request to receive proxy materials in printed form by mail or electronically by email on an ongoing basis. We believe this method of delivery will decrease costs, expedite distribution of proxy materials to you, and reduce our environmental impact. We encourage stockholders to take advantage of the availability of the proxy materials on the Internet to help reduce the environmental impact of our Annual Meeting. Stockholders who received the Notice but would like to receive a printed copy of the proxy materials in the mail should follow the instructions in the Notice for requesting such materials. Stockholders of record will receive a full set of proxy materials, which will also be sent out on or about March 11, 2015.

We are furnishing you these proxy materials in connection with the solicitation of proxies on behalf of our Board of Directors (the “Board”) for use at the Annual Meeting. This proxy statement includes information that we are required to provide under SEC rules and is designed to assist you in voting your shares.

Proxies in proper form received by us at or before the time of the Annual Meeting will be voted as specified. You may specify your choices by marking the appropriate boxes on your proxy card. If a proxy card is dated, signed and returned

without specifying choices, the proxies will be voted in accordance with the recommendations of the Board set forth in this proxy statement, and, in their discretion, upon such other business as may properly come before the Annual Meeting. Business transacted at the Annual Meeting will be confined to the purposes stated in the Notice of Annual Meeting. Shares of our common stock, par value $0.01 per share (“Common Stock”), cannot be voted at the Annual Meeting unless the holder is present in person or represented by proxy.

The Notice will provide you with instructions regarding how to (1) view on the Internet our proxy materials for the Annual Meeting; and (2) instruct us to send proxy materials to you by email. The proxy materials are also available on our website at

www.amnhealthcare.com under the “Investor Relations” tab. Choosing to receive proxy materials by email will save us the cost of printing and mailing documents to you and will reduce the impact of our annual meetings on the environment.

The proxy materials include:

If you receive a paper copy of these materials by mail, the proxy materials also include a proxy card.

Proxies will be solicited on behalf of the Board by mail, telephone, email or other electronic means or in person, and we will pay the solicitation costs. We will supply our proxy materials, including our 2014 Annual Report, to brokers, dealers, banks and voting trustees, or their nominees for the

purpose of soliciting proxies from beneficial owners, and we will reimburse them for their reasonable expenses. We have retained MacKenzie Partners, Inc. to assist in soliciting proxies for a fee of $7,000, plus reasonable out-of-pocket expenses.

In accordance with our Amended and Restated By-laws (the “Bylaws”), the Board has fixed the close of business on February 25, 2015 as the record date (the “Record Date”) for determining the stockholders entitled to notice of and to vote at the Annual Meeting or any adjournment or postponement thereof. At the close of business on the Record Date, the

outstanding number of our voting securities was 47,200,757 shares. Each stockholder is entitled to one vote for each share of Common Stock he or she held as of the Record Date. Shares cannot be voted at the Annual Meeting unless the holder is present in person or represented by proxy.

The following matters will be voted on at the Annual Meeting:

With respect to Proposal 1, the election of directors, you may vote FOR, AGAINST or ABSTAIN. Our Bylaws require that in an election in which the number of director nominees does not exceed the number of directors to be elected, each director will be elected by the vote of the majority of the votes cast (in person or by proxy). A “majority of the votes cast” means that the number of shares cast “FOR” a director’s election exceeds the number of votes cast “AGAINST” that director’s election. In accordance with our Bylaws, the following do not count as votes cast: (a) a share otherwise present at the meeting, but for which there is an abstention; and (b) a share otherwise present at the meeting as to which a stockholder gives no authority or direction. In an uncontested election, a nominee who does not receive a majority of the votes cast will not be elected. An incumbent director who is not elected because he or she does not

receive a majority of the votes cast will continue to serve as a holdover director, but shall tender his or her resignation to the Board. Within 90 days after the date of the certification of the election results, the Corporate Governance Committee will make a recommendation to the Board on whether to accept or reject the resignation or whether other action should be taken, and the Board will act on the Corporate Governance Committee’s recommendation and publicly disclose its decision and the rationale behind it.

With respect to Proposals 2 and 3 (or on any other matter to be voted on at the Annual Meeting), you may vote FOR, AGAINST or ABSTAIN. If you ABSTAIN from voting on either Proposal 2 or 3, the abstention will have the same effect as an AGAINST vote.

The Board recommends that you vote:

How to vote your shares depends on whether you hold your shares as a “stockholder of record” or as a “beneficial owner,” which terms we explain in Question 12 below. If you are a stockholder of record, you can vote in the following ways:

If you are a beneficial owner, you should follow the instructions in the Notice or your broker should give you instructions for voting your shares. In these cases, you may vote by Internet, telephone or mail, as applicable. You may vote your shares beneficially held through your broker in person if you attend the Annual Meeting and you obtain a valid proxy from your broker giving you the legal right to vote the shares at the Annual Meeting.

Stockholder of Record. You are a stockholder of record if at the close of business on the Record Date your shares were registered directly in your name with American Stock Transfer & Trust Company, LLC, our transfer agent.

Beneficial Owner. You are a beneficial owner if at the close of business on the Record Date your shares were held by a brokerage firm or other nominee and not in your name. Being

a beneficial owner means that, like most of our stockholders, your shares are held in “street name.” As the beneficial owner, you have the right to direct your broker or nominee how to vote your shares by following the voting instructions your broker or other nominee provides. If you do not provide your broker or nominee with instructions on how to vote your shares, your broker or nominee will be able to vote your shares as described below.

Stockholders of Record. If you are the stockholder of record and you do not vote by proxy card, by telephone, via the Internet or in person at the Annual Meeting, your shares will not be voted at the Annual Meeting.

Beneficial Owners. If you are the beneficial owner and you do not direct your broker or nominee how to vote your shares, your broker or nominee may vote your shares only on those

proposals for which it has discretion to vote. Under the rules of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”), your broker or nominee does not have discretion to vote your shares on non-routine matters such as Proposals 1 and 2. We believe that Proposal 3 — ratification of our auditor — is a routine matter on which brokers and nominees can vote on behalf of their clients if clients do not furnish voting instructions.

Brokers or other nominees who hold shares for a beneficial owner have the discretion to vote on routine proposals when they have not received voting instructions from the beneficial owner at least ten days prior to the Annual Meeting. A broker non-vote occurs when a broker or other nominee does not receive voting instructions from the beneficial owner and does not have the discretion to direct the voting of the shares. Broker non-votes will be counted for purposes of calculating

whether a quorum is present at the Annual Meeting, but will not be counted for purposes of determining the number of votes present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote with respect to certain proposals. Accordingly, a broker non-vote will not impact our ability to obtain a quorum nor will it impact any vote that requires a majority of the votes cast (Proposal 1).

Yes, you may revoke a proxy you have given at any time before it is voted at the Annual Meeting by (1) giving our Secretary a letter revoking the proxy, which the Secretary must receive prior to the Annual Meeting, or (2) attending the Annual Meeting and voting in person. Attendance at the Annual Meeting does not standing alone constitute your

revocation of a proxy. You may change your vote at any time prior to the voting of your shares at the Annual Meeting by (a) casting a new vote by telephone or over the Internet by the time and date set forth in Question 11 above; or (b) sending a new proxy card with a later date that is received prior to the Annual Meeting.

We will announce preliminary results at the Annual Meeting. We will publish final results in a current report on Form 8-K that we will file with the SEC within four business days after the Annual Meeting. If the official results are not available at

that time, we will provide preliminary voting results in the Form 8-K and will provide the final results in an amendment to the Form 8-K as soon as they become available.

The Board is elected by the stockholders to oversee their interest in the overall success of our business and financial strength. The Board serves as our ultimate decision-making body to the extent set forth in our Certificate of Incorporation

and Bylaws. It also selects and oversees members of our senior management, who, in turn, oversee our day-to-day business and affairs.

Eight directors are to be elected at the Annual Meeting to hold office until the next annual meeting or until their successors are duly elected and qualified, or until the director resigns, is removed, or becomes disqualified. The proxy will be voted in accordance with the directions stated on the card, or, if no directions are stated, for election of each of the eight nominees listed below. Upon the recommendation of the Corporate Governance Committee, the members of the Board have nominated for election our eight current directors. The director nominees for election named below are willing to be duly elected and to serve. If any such nominee is not a candidate for election at the Annual Meeting, an event that the Board does not anticipate, the proxies will be voted for a substitute nominee. We set forth information with respect to the business experience, qualifications and affiliations of our director nominees below.

		Mark G. Foletta Director Since December 2012 Age: 54 Board Committees: Audit Committee Business Experience, Qualifications and Affiliations: The Board has concluded that

Mr. Foletta is qualified to serve on the Board because he brings considerable audit, financial and healthcare experience and also has experience as a public company director. Mr. Foletta is also designated as a financial expert on the Audit Committee. Since February 2013, Mr. Foletta has served as a director of Regulus Therapeutics Inc., and is Chairman of its Audit Committee and a member of its Nominating and Governance Committee. Since November 2014, Mr. Foletta has served on the Board of DexCom, Inc., a publicly-held company. Additionally, since December 2013, Mr. Foletta has served as a director of Viacyte, Inc., a privately held company. Mr. Foletta served as Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Amylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. from March 2006 until October 2012, and he previously served as Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Amylin from March 2000 to March 2006. Mr. Foletta previously served as a Principal of Triton Group Management, Inc. from 1997 to 2000. From 1986 to 1997, Mr. Foletta held a number of management positions with Intermark, Inc. and Triton Group Ltd., the most recent of which was Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and

Corporate Secretary. From 1982 to 1986, Mr. Foletta was with Ernst & Young, where upon his departure he was serving as an Audit Manager. He previously served as a director and Chairman of the Audit Committee of Ambit Biosciences Corporation (sold in 2014) and also served as a director of Anadys Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (sold in 2011). Mr. Foletta received a B.A. from the University of California, Santa Barbara. He is a Certified Public Accountant (inactive) and a member of the Corporate Directors Forum.

		R. Jeffrey Harris Director Since September 2005 Age: 60 Board Committees: Compensation and Corporate Governance Committees Business Experience, Qualifications and Affiliations: The Board has concluded that

Mr. Harris is qualified to serve on the Board because he brings considerable mergers and acquisitions experience. In addition, Mr. Harris has experience as a director on public company compensation and corporate governance committees, which experience is essential in designing and maintaining our executive compensation programs and developing our succession planning strategies. Mr. Harris served on the Board of Sybron Dental Specialties from April 2005 until Danaher Corporation acquired it in 2006. Mr. Harris served on the Board of Playtex Products, Inc. from 2001 until Energizer Holdings acquired it in October 2007. Mr. Harris was director of Prodesse, Inc., an early stage biotechnology company, from 2002 until 2009, when Gen-Probe Incorporated acquired it. Since 2002, Mr. Harris has been involved as an investor in and a director of early stage companies primarily in southeast Wisconsin, and since 2008 has been a director of Guy & O’Neill, Inc., which is in the business of formulation, packaging and liquid filling. Mr. Harris also served Apogent Technologies, Inc. in the following capacities: (1) as Of Counsel from December 2000 through 2003, (2) as Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary from 1988 to 2000 (when the company was known as Sybron International, Inc.), and (3) as a director from 2000 until Fisher Scientific International, Inc. acquired it in 2004. Mr. Harris serves on the Board of Brookfield Academy, a non-profit entity, and is Chairman of the Board and a co-founder of BrightStar Wisconsin Foundation, Inc., a non-profit economic development corporation.

		Michael M.E. Johns, M.D. Director Since December 2008 Age: 73 Board Committees: Compensation and Corporate Governance (Chair) Committees Business Experience, Qualifications and Affiliations: The Board has concluded that

Dr. Johns is qualified to serve on the Board because he has extensive healthcare experience and is a recognized healthcare thought leader. This expertise is vital in shaping our strategy to deliver innovative and expanded service offerings as a healthcare workforce solutions company. In addition, Dr. Johns served on the Board and the Compensation Committee of Johnson & Johnson from 2005 to 2014. Dr. Johns is a Professor of Medicine and Public Health at Emory University, where he also served as Chancellor from October 2007 through August 2012. Additionally, Dr. Johns has served as the Interim Executive Vice President for Medical Affairs and Interim Chief Executive Officer of the University of Michigan Health System since June 2014, which service he expects to complete in March 2015. From 1996 to 2007, Dr. Johns served as Executive Vice President for Health Affairs and Chief Executive Officer of the Robert W. Woodruff Health Sciences Center of Emory University and the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Emory Healthcare. From 1990 to 1996, Dr. Johns was Dean of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and Vice President of the Medical Faculty at Johns Hopkins University. Since 2000, Dr. Johns has served on the Board of the Genuine Parts Company, for which he is a member of its Compensation, Governance and Nominating Committee, and he is a member of the Board of Regents of the Uniformed Services University for the Health Sciences. Additionally, Dr. Johns sits on several philanthropic boards.

		Martha H. Marsh Director Since September 2010 Age: 66 Board Committees: Compensation (Chair) and Corporate Governance Committees Business Experience, Qualifications and Affiliations: The Board has concluded that

Ms. Marsh is qualified to serve on the Board because she has extensive “C-suite” leadership and expertise in the healthcare industry. Ms. Marsh’s experience and understanding of the challenges and opportunities of large healthcare facilities is immensely useful in directing our strategy to innovate and provide enhanced and expanded workforce solutions service offerings to meet our clients’ shifting needs. Ms. Marsh serves as a director of Owens & Minor, Inc., a healthcare supply

management company, and also serves on its Governance Committee, as Chairperson, and on its Compensation and Strategic Planning Committee. In 2014, Ms. Marsh was elected to the Board of Thoratec Corporation, a publicly-held medical device company, and serves on its Audit Committee. She also serves on the Board and the Compensation Committee of Teichert, a privately held company. Ms. Marsh served as President and CEO of Stanford Hospital and Clinics for eight years, from April 2002 until her retirement in August 2010. Previously, Ms. Marsh served as the CEO of UC Davis Medical Center and the Chief Operating Officer of the UC Davis Health System from 1999 to 2002. Prior to that time, she served as the Senior Vice President for Professional Services and Managed Care at the University of Pennsylvania Health System, and before that as President and CEO of Matthew Thornton Health Plan in Nashua, New Hampshire. Ms. Marsh is a past Chair of the Board of Trustees for the California Hospital Association and the California Association of Hospitals and Health Systems and a former director of Ascension Healthcare Network, a privately held company.

		Susan R. Salka Director Since September 2003 Age: 50 Board Committees: Executive Committee Business Experience, Qualifications and Affiliations: Ms. Salka has served as our

President since May 2003 and our CEO since May 2005. The Board has concluded that Ms. Salka is qualified to serve on the Board because she has over 25 years of experience in the healthcare services industry, including 25 years of experience with us in various roles. In such roles, she has helped grow our business both organically and through acquisitions into the national industry leader we are today. Ms. Salka also has experience serving on other public company boards. Since 1990, Ms. Salka has been employed by us in a variety of leadership positions, including Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer. Prior to joining us, Ms. Salka worked at BioVest Partners, a venture capital firm, and at Hybritech, a subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Co., which Beckman Coulter later acquired. Since October 2014, Ms. Salka has served as a director of McKesson Corp. and is a member of its Audit Committee. Ms. Salka served on the Board and the Audit Committee of Beckman Coulter from 2007 until 2011, when Danaher Corporation acquired it. Additionally, she served on the Board of Playtex Products, Inc. from 2001 until Energizer Holdings acquired it in October 2007. Ms. Salka also serves on the Board of San Diego State University Campanile Foundation.

		Andrew M. Stern Director Since November 2001 Age: 65 Board Committees: Audit and Corporate Governance Committees Business Experience, Qualifications and Affiliations: The Board has concluded that

Mr. Stern is qualified to serve on the Board because he brings deep and long-standing healthcare industry experience as well as unparalleled investor communications and media expertise, which have been critical in guiding the structuring of our communications strategy with our investors, clients and other key stakeholders. Since 1983, Mr. Stern has served as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Sunwest Communications, Inc., a public relations firm. From 1975 to 1977, he served as Staff Assistant to President Gerald R. Ford at The White House and then served in senior corporate positions until founding Sunwest in 1982. Mr. Stern also serves as a director of Medical City Dallas Hospital and as an advisory director of the Center for Political Communication and is a member of the Committee on Governance of the American Hospital Association.

		Paul E. Weaver Director Since July 2006 Age: 69 Board Committees: Audit (Chair) and Executive Committees Business Experience, Qualifications and Affiliations: The Board has concluded that

Mr. Weaver is qualified to serve on the Board because of his extensive international audit and finance experience and sophistication, which are instrumental to the Audit Committee’s effective review of periodic financial disclosures, evaluation of our independent auditors and our internal controls, and understanding of critical accounting practices and complex tax matters. Accordingly, Mr. Weaver is designated as a financial expert on the Audit Committee. Mr. Weaver is a former Vice Chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and was Chairman of its global technology, infocom and entertainment/media practice group. Mr. Weaver serves on the Board of Unisys Corporation, and beginning on January 1, 2015 serves as Unisys Corporation’s Chairman of the Board. He is also Chairman of its Audit Committee. Additionally, Mr. Weaver serves on the Board of WellCare Health Plans, Inc., is Chairman of its Audit Committee, and is a member of its Compensation Committee. He also serves as Chairman of the Board of the Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation, a not-for-profit entity. Mr. Weaver previously served on the Board of Gateway, Inc. and the Board of Idearc Inc.

		Douglas D. Wheat Chairman of the Board Director Since 1999 Age: 64 Board Committees: Executive Committee Business Experience, Qualifications and Affiliations: The Board has concluded that

Mr. Wheat is qualified to serve on the Board because he possesses significant healthcare staffing industry knowledge and extensive expertise in corporate finance and mergers and acquisitions. Such knowledge and expertise are critical to the successful design and implementation of our growth strategy. Since April 2013, Mr. Wheat has served as Vice Chairman of the Board of Dex Media, Inc. Since August 2014, he has also served as a director of Overseas Shipholding Group, Inc., a publicly traded company, and was appointed its Chairman of the Board in December 2014. Mr. Wheat formerly served as Chairman of the Board of SuperMedia Inc., from 2010 until its merger with Dex Media in April 2013. Mr. Wheat previously served on the boards of several other companies, including Nebraska Book Company, Inc., Smarte Carte Corporation, and Playtex Products, Inc., for which he was Chairman from 2004 to 2006. Since 2007, Mr. Wheat has been a partner of Southlake Equity Group.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE ELECTION OF

EACH OF THE EIGHT DIRECTOR NOMINEES NAMED ABOVE.

We have a strong commitment to promoting a culture of ethics and integrity, and our values define the way we do business. The Board is committed to fostering a strong ethical tone at the Company and expects all of its employees to strive to fulfill their responsibilities in accordance with the highest standards of professional and personal conduct. Accordingly, we have adopted the following:

We publish the above-referenced documents, as they may be modified from time to time, in the link entitled “Corporate Governance” located within the “Investor Relations” tab of our website at www.amnhealthcare.com. We also make these materials available in print to any stockholder upon request. The Board regularly reviews corporate governance developments and modifies the Guidelines, the Code of Business Conduct and the Financial Officers Code of Ethics as warranted.

The Board has adopted categorical standards for director independence, which we set forth in the Guidelines. Under these standards, a director will not be considered independent if:

The Board does not consider the following relationships to be material relationships that would impair a director’s independence:

The Board has determined that director nominees Mark G. Foletta, R. Jeffrey Harris, Dr. Michael M.E. Johns, Martha H. Marsh, Andrew M. Stern, Paul E. Weaver and Douglas D. Wheat meet our categorical standards for director independence and the applicable rules and regulations of the NYSE and federal securities laws regarding director independence. Our CEO is the only member of our Board who the Board has not deemed independent.

The Guidelines establish directors’ duties to adhere to our Code of Business Conduct, including our policies on conflicts of interest, and to avoid any action, position or interest that conflicts with an interest of ours or gives the appearance of a conflict. We require directors to report any potential conflicts

of interest immediately to the Chairman of the Corporate Governance Committee. We do not, without approval of the Board, permit a director or executive officer, or his or her immediate family member (i.e., spouse, parent, step-parent, child, step-child, sibling, mother-in-law, father-in-law,

son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law or anyone (other than a tenant or employee) who shares that person’s home) or any other person meeting the definition of “related person” under Item 404 of Regulation S-K promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) (each, a “related person”), to enter into a transaction in which we are a participant if (a) the amount involved exceeds $120,000; and (b) the related person has or will have a direct or indirect material

interest. We annually solicit information from directors and executive officers to monitor potential conflicts of interest and comply with SEC requirements regarding approval or disclosure of “related person transactions.” We did not engage in any transaction in 2014 nor is there any currently proposed transaction that exceeds or is expected to exceed $120,000 in which we were or are a participant and in which a related person had or will have a direct or indirect material interest.

We expect each of our Board members to attend each meeting of the Board and of the committees on which he or she serves. We expect our directors to attend our annual meeting of stockholders. During 2014, the Board met nine times and took one action by unanimous written consent. In 2014, no member of the Board attended fewer than 75% of

the aggregate of (i) the total number of meetings of the Board (held during the period for which he or she has been a director) and (ii) the number of meetings held by all committees of the Board (during the periods that he or she served on such committees). All of our directors attended our 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

We currently separate the roles of Chairman of the Board and the Chief Executive Officer. Our CEO, Ms. Salka, is responsible for working with the Board in setting our strategic direction and our day-to-day leadership and performance, while the Chairman of the Board, Mr. Wheat, leads the Board in overseeing our strategy, provides guidance to our CEO and presides over meetings of the Board. The Board believes that having separate roles:

The Board as a whole is responsible for overseeing our risk exposure as part of determining a business strategy that generates long-term shareholder value. The Board shapes our enterprise-wide risk capacity, appetite and tolerance levels that provide the foundation for our overall strategy and direction. The Board recognizes that risk mitigation not only preserves value, but also, when risk is managed appropriately, creates value and opportunity.

Indeed, purposeful and appropriate risk-taking in certain areas is important for us to be competitive and to achieve our long-term goals. Accordingly, the Board has implemented a risk governance framework in which it identifies periodically key risks facing us and determines our risk appetite for each of the identified key risks. We have designed our enterprise risk management process utilizing open communication between our executive team and Board to regularly highlight the opportunities and threats to our business and the steps we are willing to take to capitalize on our business opportunities and to mitigate against identified risks. As part of this process, we maintain an Enterprise Risk Management Committee, which as part of our annual strategic planning assists the

Board in identifying key risks. We typically focus on five to eight risks annually, which risks may relate to, among other things, business operations, competitive landscape, supply of quality healthcare professionals, talent, technology systems and innovative strategies. The Enterprise Risk Management Committee also assists the Board in determining our risk tolerance for each key risk in light of our (1) existing risk capacity, (2) appetite, if any, to take on additional risk, (3) risk velocity and (4) mitigation factors. The Board’s determination of our key risks and our tolerance for each ultimately directly influences how we operate our business, including how we marshal our resources and make operational decisions.

With the oversight of our Board, members of our executive team, including our CEO, are given overall responsibility for monitoring and managing one or more identified key risks as well as Company risk generally. The members of our executive team and others, in turn, facilitate an appropriate culture of integrity and risk awareness for our team members. We also maintain internal processes and an internal control environment to facilitate the identification and management of risks. Our Board meets with management at regular Board

meetings and, if necessary, at other times to discuss strategy and success in addressing our identified key risks along with any others that may face us from time to time.

In addition to the foregoing, each of the Board’s standing committees set forth below focuses attention on risk areas implicated by its area of expertise, and reports regularly to the Board on such risks. All committees play significant roles in carrying out the risk oversight function.

The Audit Committee assists the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities of our compliance with ethical and certain legal requirements, and our process to manage business and financial risk. Among other things, the Audit Committee’s specific duties include:

The Compensation and Stock Plan Committee (the “Compensation Committee”) is responsible for analyzing the risk associated with our compensation practices. We design our incentive compensation to reward officers and other key employees for committing to and delivering on financial goals that we believe are challenging yet (i) reasonably achievable; (ii) require meaningful revenue and profitability performance to reach the target level; and (iii) require substantial revenue and profitability performance to reach the maximum level. The financial performance required to reach the maximum level of compensation is developed within the context of budget planning and, while difficult to achieve, is not viewed to be at such an aggressive level that it would induce bonus-eligible employees to take inappropriate risks that could threaten our financial and operating stability. The Compensation Committee has reviewed our material cash incentive plans, which fall into two types: (1) those for front line sales production employees and (2) those for the

sales and corporate leadership. The front line sales incentive plans typically provide incentives based on monthly or quarterly financial or individual and team operational metrics, and include monthly or quarterly payouts. The sales and corporate leadership plans use annual financial targets based on consolidated and/or division metrics as well as individual leadership and performance considerations, and include quarterly or annual payouts. We have internal controls over financial reporting and the measurement and calculation of compensation goals, and other financial, operational and compliance policies and practices that are designed to keep these compensation programs from being susceptible to manipulation by any employee, including our named executive officers.

The Compensation Committee considers the risks associated with the compensation plans in light of several factors, including (1) the amount of incentive compensation paid to a particular group as a percentage of total incentive cash paid and as a percentage of division and/or consolidated revenue, gross profit and EBITDA; (2) the number of plan participants in any particular plan as a percentage of total incentive plan participants; and (3) the amount of incentive compensation per individual plan participant, which typically ranges from 10% to 60% of total compensation (and can range from roughly 60% to 75% of named executive officers’ total compensation). The Compensation Committee believes the use of a long-term incentive award program that has targets that span a three-year performance period balances risk and reward by discouraging excessive risk that could threaten our long-term value, but at the same time encourages innovation to build our value in the short- and long-term. The Compensation Committee also reviews our program for design features that have been identified by experts as having the potential to encourage excessive risk-taking, such as: (A) too much focus on equity, (B) compensation mix overly weighted toward short-term results, (C) highly leveraged payout curves and steep payout cliffs at specific performance levels that could encourage short-term actions to meet payout thresholds, and (D) unreasonable goals or thresholds. After its consideration of the foregoing factors, the Compensation Committee has determined that our compensation programs and policies do not create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on us.

The Corporate Governance Committee considers the risk associated with our quality programs. It reviews and discusses with our management relevant quality metrics, performance improvement, compliance with certification standards and related laws and regulations as well as our enterprise risk management process relating to the quality of our services.

We have standing Audit, Corporate Governance, Compensation and Executive Committees. The Board committees are chaired by independent directors, each of whom reports to the Board at Board meetings on the activities and decisions made by their respective committees. The Board makes committee assignments and designates committee chairs based on a director’s independence, knowledge and areas of expertise. We believe this structure helps facilitate efficient decision-making and communication among our directors and fosters efficient Board functioning at

Board meetings. In line with our core value of continuous improvement, the directors conduct an evaluation of the performance of the Board and each of the committees on an annual basis. We describe the current functions and members of each committee below. A more detailed description of the function, duties and responsibilities of the Audit, Corporate Governance and Compensation Committees is included in each Committee’s charter available in the link entitled “Corporate Governance” located within the “Investor Relations” tab of our website at www.amnhealthcare.com.

Audit Committee. Our Audit Committee Charter, last amended in December 2014, sets forth the duties of the Audit Committee. Generally, the Audit Committee is responsible for, among other things, overseeing our financial reporting process. In the course of performing its functions, the Audit Committee, as provided by our Audit Committee Charter:

Corporate Governance Committee. Our Corporate Governance Committee Charter, last amended in September 2014, sets forth the duties of the Corporate Governance Committee. Generally, the Corporate Governance Committee:

With respect to director nominee procedures, the Corporate Governance Committee utilizes a broad approach for identification of director nominees and may seek recommendations from our directors, officers or stockholders or it may choose to engage a search firm. In evaluating and determining whether to ultimately recommend a person as a candidate for election as a director, the Corporate Governance Committee considers the qualifications set forth in our Guidelines, including judgment, business and management experience (including financial literacy), leadership, strategic planning, reputation for honesty and integrity, diversity and independence from management. It also takes into account specific characteristics and expertise that it believes will enhance the diversity of knowledge, expertise, background and personal characteristics of the Board. The Corporate Governance Committee may engage a third party to conduct or assist with the evaluation. Ultimately, the Corporate Governance Committee seeks to recommend to the Board those nominees whose specific qualities, experience and expertise will augment the current Board’s composition and whose past experience evidences that they will (1) dedicate sufficient time, energy and attention to ensure the diligent performance of Board duties; (2) comply with all duties of care, loyalty and confidentiality applicable to them as directors of publicly traded corporations; and (3) adhere to our Code of Business Conduct.

The Corporate Governance Committee considers stockholder recommendations of qualified nominees when such recommendations are submitted in accordance with the procedures described in the Bylaws. To have a nominee considered by the Corporate Governance Committee for election at the 2016 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, a stockholder must submit the recommendation in writing to the attention of our Secretary at our corporate headquarters no later than January 23, 2016 and no sooner than December 24, 2015. Any such recommendation must include the information set forth on Exhibit A to this proxy statement (page A-1). Once we receive the recommendation, we will deliver to the stockholder nominee a questionnaire that requests additional information about his or her independence, qualifications and other matters that would assist the Corporate Governance Committee in evaluating the stockholder nominee, as well as certain information that must be disclosed about him or her in our proxy statement or other regulatory filings, if nominated. Stockholder nominees must complete and return the questionnaire within the timeframe provided to be considered for nomination by the Corporate Governance Committee.

The Corporate Governance Committee received no recommendation for a director nominee from any stockholder for the director election to be held at the Annual Meeting.

Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee Charter, last amended in April 2013, sets forth the duties of the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee

(i) reviews, administers, and, where applicable, makes recommendations to the Board regarding (A) compensation (including employment agreements or severance arrangements, if applicable, and executive supplemental benefits or perquisites, if any) of our CEO, all senior officers that report directly to our CEO, and the directors and (B) our incentive compensation plans and equity-based plans; (ii) prepares the Compensation Committee Report and oversees the preparation of our compensation disclosure and analysis required by the SEC to be included in our annual proxy statement and recommends their inclusion in the annual proxy statement to the Board; (iii) recommends the frequency of the “say-on-pay” vote in the non-binding shareholder proposal required by SEC rules; and (iv) evaluates the performance of our CEO.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation. The Compensation Committee consists exclusively of non-employee, independent directors, none of whom has a business relationship with us, other than in his or her capacity as director, or has any interlocking relationships with us that are subject to disclosure under the rules of the SEC related to proxy statements.

The Compensation Committee reviews all components of compensation of the named executive officers and other senior officers that directly report to our CEO on an annual basis and will consider changes at other times if a change in the scope of the officer’s responsibilities justifies such consideration. The Compensation Committee generally conducts its salary and bonus structure review for a particular year in the last quarter of the previous year or early in the subject year. At that time, the Compensation Committee evaluates compensation by, among other things, reviewing (1) peer benchmarking information relating to financial performance and compensation levels, (2) the individual’s performance and duties, (3) analysis and advice from its compensation consultant, (4) our financial and operational performance, and (5) the recommendations of our CEO (who does not provide a recommendation for herself). With respect to our Senior Management Incentive Bonus Plan, as Amended and Restated (the “Bonus Plan”), which our stockholders reapproved in April 2012, the Compensation Committee, as the administrator of the Bonus Plan, designates which participants are eligible for an award, the performance criteria for the award and the maximum award each year. Prior to or at the beginning of each fiscal year, the Board sets financial targets for our performance. Thereafter, the Compensation Committee sets the range of financial performance and corresponding targets for the named executive officers’ cash incentive compensation under the Bonus Plan.

The Compensation Committee may also grant annual equity awards under our Equity Plan, as Amended and Restated (the “Equity Plan”). In addition to annual grants, the Compensation Committee has granted equity awards to key

employees upon their initial employment, promotion or as special retention awards. To further serve this purpose, the Board adopted our 2014 Employment Inducement Plan under which we may issue up to 200,000 shares of our Common Stock to prospective employees and officers. In the Compensation Committee’s discretion, it may authorize our CEO to grant equity awards to non-officer employees within certain individual and aggregate thresholds with the effective date of each such grant generally being the effective date of the grantee’s promotion or commencement of employment. The Compensation Committee reviews any awards granted by our CEO. The Compensation Committee does not have any policy or practice to time the grant of equity awards in conjunction with the release of material non-public information.

The Compensation Committee retains an independent consultant to assist it in fulfilling its responsibilities. Since 2008, the Compensation Committee has utilized Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc. as its compensation consultant. Our compensation consultant advises the Compensation Committee on a variety of topics, including, among others, our equity compensation program, the design of our cash incentive program, the evaluation of the alignment of our compensation program with our stockholders’ interests, the risks presented by our executive compensation program structure, the assessment of the program compared to our peers and director and executive compensation trends.

In retaining and utilizing Frederic W. Cook & Co., the Compensation Committee considers (1) directors’ experience with its employees and representatives while serving on other boards, (2) knowledge and experience in executive compensation program design, corporate finance and legal and regulatory issues, (3) experience providing consultative services to boards, as well as its analysis of our existing program and proposal of key considerations in evaluating and strengthening our program and (4) factors affecting independence, including factors set forth by the NYSE for evaluating the independence of advisors. In connection with its consideration of Frederic W. Cook & Co.’s independence, the Compensation Committee factored in that Frederic W. Cook & Co. does provide consulting services to other companies that have a director who is also a director of ours, but it does not have any other relationship with or provide any other services to us. As a result of the Compensation Committee’s review of the factors affecting independence, it has determined that Frederic W. Cook  & Co. is independent and has no conflicts of interest with us.

Executive Committee. The Executive Committee exercises the power of the Board in the interval between meetings of the Board.

The Board has established the following procedure for stockholders to communicate with members of the Board and for all interested parties to communicate with the presiding director or the non-management directors as a group. All such communications should be addressed to the attention of our Secretary at our corporate headquarters located at 12400

High Bluff Drive, San Diego, CA 92130. The Secretary collects and maintains a log of each such communication and forwards any that the Secretary believes requires immediate attention to the appropriate member or group of members of the Board, who then determines how such communication should be addressed.

We pay non-employee directors an annual cash retainer and no meeting fees. Additionally, the Chairman of the Board and Committee Chairpersons receive an additional annual retainer. We also reimburse directors for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with their service. Annual retainers are

payable in four equal quarterly installments. The table below sets forth the annual retainers for fiscal year 2014.

We do not have a program of automatic annual equity grants, but historically have granted equity awards to non-employee directors upon appointment or election to the Board, and annually thereafter during the director’s term. Although discretionary, we anticipate that we will continue to grant annual equity awards to non-employee directors at some level. The aggregate grant date fair value of such awards has typically been two to three times that of the director cash retainer.

On April 23, 2014, we granted each non-employee director an equity award of 10,490 restricted stock units (“RSUs”), which will vest on April 22, 2015. Each director had the option of deferring receipt of shares of Common Stock underlying vested RSUs until his or her separation of service or receiving them upon vesting.

The Board believes that all directors should maintain a meaningful personal financial stake in the Company to align their long-term interests with those of our stockholders. Accordingly, it is the Board’s desire that each non-employee director will hold Common Stock and vested but unsettled RSUs of the Company equal to a value of at least three times

the director’s annual cash retainer, i.e., $150,000. The value of unvested RSUs and vested or unvested SARs and options are not taken into account in determining whether a director meets our director equity ownership guidelines. As of December 31, 2014, all of our directors satisfy our director equity ownership guidelines.

The following Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) provides a detailed description of our executive compensation objectives, philosophy, practices and programs as well as how the Compensation Committee determines executive compensation under those programs. In particular, this CD&A provides information related to each of the following aspects of our executive compensation program: (1) the objectives and philosophy of our executive compensation program; (2) our executive compensation oversight, processes and criteria; (3) the components of our

compensation program; and (4) how each component fits into our overall compensation objectives.

Our CD&A focuses on the compensation of our named executive officers for fiscal year 2014, who were: (1) Susan R. Salka, President and Chief Executive Officer, (2) Brian M. Scott, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Accounting Officer and Treasurer, (3) Ralph S. Henderson, President, Healthcare Staffing, and (4) Denise L. Jackson, Senior Vice President, General Counsel & Secretary.

We believe that our executive compensation program should be and is designed to help us build long-term shareholder value. Among other things, the Compensation Committee premises our compensation objectives on the following guiding principles:

What We Do

What We Don’t Do

2014 Financial, Operational and Stock Performance Highlights

A long-standing principle of our executive compensation program is to link pay to performance. Accordingly, when making compensation decisions, we analyze our financial, operational and stock performance and execution on our strategic initiatives. As set forth below, the Company delivered positive financial, operational and stock performance in 2014 and continued to make significant progress on our long-term strategic goals.⁽¹⁾

Highlights for 2014 included:

Our “Executive Compensation Philosophy” embraces the following principles:⁽⁴⁾

With this philosophy as our foundation, we have designed and continually evaluate and modify, as necessary, our executive compensation program to support our strategic objectives of achieving above-market growth in revenue and profitability by (1) being a market leader and innovator in healthcare workforce solutions and staffing services, (2) growing our overall revenue mix from workforce solutions and technology and (3) delivering a superior customer experience through operational excellence and agility.

Our executive compensation philosophy is reflected in the primary components of our executive compensation program: (1) base salary, (2) annual cash performance bonuses, and

(3) long-term incentive awards, typically in the form of equity. The Compensation Committee’s overall philosophy is to set total direct compensation (salary, short-term annual performance awards, and long-term incentive awards) at or about the median level as compared to our peer group, although individual peer comparisons vary based on individual performance and experience, scope of responsibilities, internal parity considerations and the recommendations of our CEO (for compensation other than her own).

Base Salary

We utilize base salary as an essential component of our executive compensation program. We utilize base salary to attract and retain talented executives and to provide them with a fixed base of cash compensation. As set forth below, we analyze a variety of factors in addition to peer group comparative information in setting salaries for our named executive officers.

Annual Cash Incentive Performance Bonus

The principles associated with our performance-based compensation reflect a balance of objectives. Our annual cash incentive consists of (1) a financial performance component that we base solely on our annual operational results as measured against certain financial metrics (the “Financial Component”) and (2) a non-financial component based on, among other things, (A) our performance relative to our direct competitors and (B) individual leadership contributions (the “Relative Performance/Individual Leadership Component”). We focus the Financial Component on the achievement of financial targets set out in our Annual Operating Plan that we set with the goal of achieving what we believe constitutes above market performance in the healthcare workforce solutions industry. Because we base our Annual Operating Plan on goals related to the execution of our operational and business strategies, the annual cash incentive plan supports the achievement of our strategic goals. The Relative Performance/Individual Leadership Component of our annual cash incentive focuses on incentivizing both superior performance over our direct competitors as measured against certain financial metrics and effective leadership in line with our core values and executive leadership competencies. The Compensation Committee also

considers relative and total shareholder return in determining our CEO’s award under the Relative Performance/Individual Leadership Component. We may also utilize the Relative Performance/Individual Leadership Component as a partial countermeasure if our financial targets established under our Annual Operating Plan at the beginning of the year do not ultimately reflect above-market performance.

Long-Term Incentives

Our long-term incentive program is designed to provide leverage both up and down based on relative performance so that the total pay package is ultimately meaningfully below the peer median in case of relative poor stock performance and meaningfully above the peer group median for relative stock outperformance. In 2014, our long-term incentive plan had three vehicles focused on ensuring executive pay alignment with our stockholders as follows:

The principal responsibilities of the Compensation Committee include oversight of our executive compensation programs. Specifically, they include:

The duties of the Compensation Committee require specific knowledge regarding the executive compensation market.

Accordingly, to understand our position within the marketplace for management talent and to assist the Compensation Committee in making compensation decisions that will help attract and retain a strong management team, the Compensation Committee reviews (1) peer financial performance and compensation information, (2) our financial performance both against our internal financial targets and our designated peer group, and (3) internal compensation comparability among senior executives.

Because the Compensation Committee compares our performance against that of our peer group as part of its oversight responsibilities, it must determine our peer group. Indeed, the Compensation Committee believes that one of the most important factors that it must consider in ensuring that our compensation program remains competitive is the proper identification and selection of our peers, as we often compete for executive talent with such peers. Accordingly, the Compensation Committee evaluates and modifies, as appropriate, the members of our peer group annually. We select peers primarily from the healthcare staffing and management services sector and the commercial recruitment and staffing sector, and to a lesser extent, from the broader healthcare service industry. Like us, many of our peers are in both the S&P SmallCap 600 Index and the S&P Composite 1500 Index.

Our peer group ranges from approximately $513 million to $2.36 billion in revenues based on each peer’s most recently

reported four fiscal quarters (as of February 23, 2015) and from approximately $347 million to $1.74 billion in market capitalization (as of December 31, 2014). For purposes of comparison, our consolidated revenue for our most recently reported last four fiscal quarters equaled $1.036 billion, which places us at slightly under the median of our peer group for revenue. Our market capitalization as of December 31, 2014 equaled approximately $914 million, which put us in the third quartile of our peer group for market capitalization. Our peer group as determined by our Compensation Committee in September 2014 is as follows:

Peer

Amedisys, Inc.

CDI Corp.

Cross Country Healthcare, Inc.

Gentiva Health Services, Inc.

Healthways, Inc.

Heidrick & Struggles International, Inc.

Insperity, Inc.

IPC The Hospitalist Company, Inc.

Kforce, Inc.

Korn/Ferry International

LHC Group, Inc.

MedAssets, Inc.

On Assignment, Inc.

TrueBlue, Inc.

In line with our core value of continuous improvement, we actively listen to our stockholders and review our actions to ensure that we have designed and implemented compensation programs that we believe will create value for our stockholders with a balance of short- and long-term incentives. The principal components of our executive compensation program include:

Base Salary

Base salary serves as the first component of our executive compensation program. In setting base salaries, the

Compensation Committee considers a number of factors, including:

We evaluate our operational and financial performance in light of our annual internal objectives and our Annual Operating Plan, the healthcare staffing industry performance and peer benchmarking data. We evaluate our stock performance against our peer group and the Russell 2000 Index. Our CEO bases her recommendations on the same factors the Compensation Committee considers, and her recommendations are particularly helpful for the Compensation Committee to evaluate an individual’s performance, knowledge, experience and responsibility.

Annual Cash Incentive Performance Bonus

Annual cash performance bonus opportunities serve as the second component of our executive compensation program. The Bonus Plan is the mechanism by which the Compensation Committee provides such opportunities. We intend our Bonus Plan to provide a strong incentive for our officers to achieve primarily short-term, annual financial objectives that support our strategic objectives. Although certain details of the annual bonus incentive may change from year to year based upon the Compensation Committee’s focus, a few key components comprise its general structure, including specific financial goals based on our Annual Operating Plan. The metrics typically include such financial measures as consolidated revenue and consolidated Adjusted EBITDA. The Compensation Committee sets threshold, “target” (i.e., 100%), and maximum amounts for bonuses and a weight for each metric that corresponds to the level of achievement we require to trigger a threshold, target or maximum bonus for the named executive officer under such metric. The threshold level (a threshold that must be reached for any bonus payout) for each metric typically starts at a minimum performance level, e.g., 90% of the targeted consolidated Adjusted EBITDA, provided that the minimum level exceeds the prior year’s actual reported results. The maximum bonus typically requires a performance level of 110%-130% of the target amount for each metric. A portion of the bonuses has been based on non-financial factors, such as performance relative to direct competition, leadership and strategic metrics, and, for our CEO, total shareholder return.

In setting the named executive officers’ target bonus, the Compensation Committee evaluates benchmarking data for comparable positions generally and within our peer group, the recommendations of our CEO (except with respect to her target bonus), individual performance, knowledge, experience and responsibility, and the amount of the potential bonus under various performance scenarios. As with base salary, the Compensation Committee considers these factors in the context of each individual’s total cash compensation as well as the total compensation package (i.e., equity and cash) generally.

The Compensation Committee may amend the Bonus Plan at any time and may also amend any outstanding award granted under the Bonus Plan, provided it may not amend the Bonus Plan without the approval of our stockholders if the amendment would affect the tax deduction of payments made under it. We intend for our Bonus Plan to comply with Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”).

Long-Term Incentives

Long-term incentives in the form of equity awards have served as the third component of our executive compensation program. Under our Equity Plan, we grant equity awards with various vesting parameters, typically three years in length, to named executive officers and key employees as an incentive to have a long-term perspective in supporting and developing our strategic objectives. We also use them as an employee retention tool. In 2011, we added PRSUs to our long-term incentive structure to strengthen the performance-based component of the long-term incentive program. Currently, we utilize TSR PRSUs and EBITDA PRSUs.

Retirement and Health Plans

Retirement plans and other customary employee benefits serve as the fourth component of our executive compensation program. We adopted our 2005 Amended and Restated Executive Nonqualified Excess Plan (the “Deferred Compensation Plan”) primarily as a result of a market review that indicated that a deferred compensation plan was a significant component of executive compensation. We exclude our named executive officers from participating in our 401(k) savings plan, primarily to assist us in satisfying discrimination testing performed on our 401(k) savings plan. The Deferred Compensation Plan serves as the only retirement savings plan for our management, including our named executive officers. The Deferred Compensation Plan is not intended to be tax qualified and is an unfunded plan. We describe the Deferred Compensation Plan more fully in the section entitled “Nonqualified Deferred Compensation” below.

We offer healthcare insurance and other welfare and employee benefit programs to our named executive officers, which are the same as those programs provided to all eligible employees. We offer these plans to support our objective of attracting and retaining strong talent.

Employment and Severance Agreements

Severance arrangements serve as the fifth component of our executive compensation program. We are party to an employment agreement with our CEO, which contains severance provisions, and have entered into severance agreements with each of our other named executive officers. We entered into these agreements in support of our objectives regarding attraction and retention of strong management. In determining the appropriate severance levels, we considered survey data, advice from our compensation consultants and the Compensation Committee’s experience. We describe the terms of these agreements more fully in the section entitled “Termination of Employment and Change in Control Arrangements” below.

Our named executive officers’ 2014 direct compensation consisted of the first four components identified above. We discuss in detail below the base salary, cash bonus and long-term incentive components of our 2014 compensation program.

Base Salary

In early 2014, the Compensation Committee reviewed salary levels for the named executive officers. It considered, among other things, benchmarking data, our CEO’s recommendations and our operational, financial and stock performance. Based on its review of such factors, the Compensation Committee decided to raise annual base salaries for our named executive officers for 2014 as follows:

The base salaries for Ms. Salka, Mr. Henderson and Ms. Jackson reflect a modest cost of living increase. Mr. Scott’s salary increase was based on (1) an effort to align his total target cash compensation closer to the median of our peer group for his position, and (2) recognition of his increased experience and strong individual performance.

Bonus Plan

Target Bonus. In January 2014, the Compensation Committee reviewed the bonus level for each named executive officer, which we express as a percentage of annual base salary. After its review, it concluded that our bonus target was below market median for Mr. Scott, and accordingly increased his percentage bonus target from 65% to 75%. The Compensation Committee believes the targets, as set forth in the table immediately below, generally set our target cash compensation (i.e., salary and target bonus) at approximately the median of our peer group for our named executive officers’ respective positions given their levels of experience, responsibility and consistently strong performance.

Structure. Under the Bonus Plan for 2014, the Financial Component comprised 70% of the total target bonuses, and the Relative Performance/Individual Leadership Component comprised the remaining 30%. As a threshold matter, we had to achieve reported Adjusted EBITDA that exceeded our 2013 reported Adjusted EBITDA amount of $85.2 million before any

bonuses under any metric could be paid. We geared the Financial Component toward the achievement of financial targets set forth in the Annual Operating Plan that we believed represented above market growth for our healthcare staffing segments.

Rationale of Annual Bonus Performance Goals. The Compensation Committee chose these performance goals for a number of reasons. It chose revenue because it believes it is the best measurement to evaluate the success of our strategy to grow as a workforce solutions company. It chose a metric based on Adjusted EBITDA because management, the Board, and stockholders consistently use this measure to focus on and assess our profitability. Furthermore, the Compensation Committee believes Adjusted EBITDA is an objective measure of management’s performance, and it excludes items over which management has less control, such as amortization, interest expense and taxes. The Compensation Committee used the Relative Performance/Individual Leadership Component to, among other things, (1) provide a partial countermeasure if our financial targets did

not ultimately reflect above market performance, and (2) distinguish among individuals with respect to other non-financial metrics, such as leadership and execution on our strategic initiatives.

The actual consolidated revenue and consolidated Adjusted EBITDA amounts required to reach the 100% target level represented growth that the Compensation Committee believed exceeded general organic growth rates in the markets we serve. The threshold for a named executive officer to receive a bonus on the consolidated financial metrics required achieving 95% and 94.5% of our Annual Operating Plan target for Pre-Bonus Adjusted EBITDA⁽⁵⁾ and consolidated revenue, respectively. Additionally, receipt of the target bonus amount for each financial metric required us meeting 100% of our Annual Operating Plan for that metric.

With respect to the Relative Performance/Individual Leadership Component, the Compensation Committee believes our named executive officers provided strong leadership that resulted in a solid financial and operational year for us on an absolute basis and as compared to our peers. We successfully completed the acquisitions of Avantas, LLC and Onward Healthcare, Inc. Additionally, we made significant progress in meeting certain long-term goals, including our goals of expanding our workforce solutions

offerings and making significant progress on our digital transformation project. As a result, all named executive officers received an award under the Relative Performance/Individual Leadership Component ranging from 141% to 156% of their respective targets, with our CEO receiving a 150% award for that metric because of the foregoing and also because of the 33% growth in total shareholder return during 2014.