Greater Miami Valley Emergency Medical Services Council
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 310909738
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- Dayton, OH, USA
- Phone
- 9375863703
- Rating
- 90
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Ambulance, Emergency Medical Transport Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $60,627
- Expenses
- $60,627
- Assets
- $129,081
- Liabilities
- $132,482
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
People named in this filing
- RANDY ANDERSON (ALTERNATE PREBLE COUNTY RE)
- MARK ATER (ALTERNATE DARKE COUNTY REP)
- GREG BEEGLE (PRIMARY GREENE COUNTY REP)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To coordinate the efforts of fire/ems/private ambulance service pre-hospital care providers, hospital emergency department staff and consumers to ensure the best possible pre-hospital medical care for the victims of sudden illness or injury.
What it reported doing in 2024
Greater miami valley emergency medical services formerly provided continuing education for emergency medical services personnel, provided ems responders with up-to-date pharmacological interventions, and augmented the website database to integrate it with the regional disaster management. These services are now being performed by the greater dayton area health information network.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% 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
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 liabilities are high compared with assets.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 48
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.13; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.03; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $61K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.