Comprehensive Advanced Life Support Program

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201240867
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Plymouth, MN, USA
Phone
7632858939
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
First Aid

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,301,743
Expenses
$1,347,028
Assets
$673,808
Liabilities
$202,513

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANN GIHL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANN GIHL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $136,410 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL GRAVDAHL NRP (DIRECTOR): $11,200 total reported compensation
  • DAVID LARSON (DIRECTOR): $2,400 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Cals (comprehensive advanced life support) is an educational program designed specifically for the emergency medical training needs of physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, rns, lpns, paramedics, and allied health care professionals (eg. Crnas and respiratory therapists) who work in rural, remote, or global settings. Rural emergency care teams are, by necessity, front-line emergency care providers who must adequately evaluate and stabilize critically ill/injured patients before transfer to a medical center with greater treatment capacity. In many cases, the medical professionals have a more generalist background rather than emergency medicine. In light of the access barriers which exist between rural and urban medical centers, additional training is particularly important in rural community hospitals, often defined as critical access hospitals (cahs). Cals combines the concepts contained in many of the other advanced life support courses, providing a customizable, te

What it reported doing in 2024

The cals program provides a single curriculum uniquely suited for resource-constrained environments such as in the rural setting. The cals program provides emergency medicine for rural and remote communities. During the past year, cals provided courses in multiple states including Minnesota, Wisconsin, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Alaska, and Montana educating approximately 900 healthcare individuals responsible for emergency care in rural and remote communities with comprehensive advanced life support training. In the united states residents of rural us communities have higher maternal and infant mortality in compared with urban residents. Most areas lacking maternity care are rural. The cals program provided additional resources for rural obstetric emergency education and neonatal resuscitation training to 112 medical professionals who work in rural communities. The need for such education is needed desperately as the services for delivery and care are diminished in rural and remote areas and mortality is high. The cals program is proud to be the exclusive provider of initial emergency training to us embassy medical personal working at the department of state around the globe. New orientees in the program completed training. Over 2,400 of the us department of state foreign-service medical personnel have completed cals training over the past 20 years. Cals continues to be recognized as a unique provider of rural emergency medicine education and is recognized by the american academy of family physicians and the american college of emergency medicine as a provider of rural advanced life support training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.3%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 86.2%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $103.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 86.7%; rating input score 87; 21st 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: -3.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.4%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.3% of revenue deployed · 86.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 15 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $136K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.