Mad River Valley Ambulance Service Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237153864
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Waitsfield, VT, USA
- Phone
- 8024968888
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $578,772
- Expenses
- $406,991
- Assets
- $1,744,344
- Liabilities
- $2,625
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SARA VAN SCHAICK (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- SARA VAN SCHAICK (PRESIDENT)
- BRIAN LAVERY (VICE PRESIDE)
- CHRIS LOWENSTEIN (OPERATIONS O)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide 24-hour emergency medical service to residents and visitors of the mad river valley as well as the sugarbush and mad river glen ski areas.
What it reported doing in 2025
Since 1970, the mad river valley ambulance service (mrvas) has been providing 24-hour emergency medical service to residents and visitors of the mad river valley, as well as the sugarbush and mad river glen ski areas. Since its inception, mrvas has undergone considerable growth to keep pace with the growing needs of the community, as well as advances in emergency medical care. The service is fortunate to have a highliy dedicated group of over 60 volunteers, many of whom have advanced training and certification which enables them to perform advanced life support procedures. None of these volunteers are compensated for their time, which includes a minimum of five 12-hour duty shifts per month, plus at least one night of training each month as well as other duties required by mrvas.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 61% 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
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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 54
- Transparency & Controls: 85
- Accountability: 65
- Sustainability: 80
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 44%; rating input score 44
- Program expense ratio: 64.1%; rating input score 64
- Fundraising efficiency: $46.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th 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: 80%; rating input score 80; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 29.7%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.29; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.9% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 44% of revenue deployed · 64.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 10 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $261K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.