Marbletown First Aid Unit Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510172256
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2012
Location
High Falls, NY, USA
Phone
8456879847
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,215,648
Expenses
$1,037,217
Assets
$1,116,860
Liabilities
$133,467

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Alex Riemer (Treasurer)
  • Beth Alter (Director)
  • Mary Ann Van Benscholen (Director)

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

Marbletown First Aid Unit is now a paid squad with EMTs and committed to providing the highest quality of care, as well as prompt, efficient service for those we serve. Our commitment requires a cohesive effort combining dedicated members, an effective response system, and a knowledgeable and supportive operations and administrative team. Our patients are covered by a strict policy that forbids discrimination in care or treatment due to age, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, medical condition, or ability to pay. To meet the demands when lower than desired response rate and the shortage of qualified EMTs the organization decided to pay for EMTs during periods when staffing was challenging.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Marbletown First Aid Unit provides the highest quality of basic emergency life support and care for its community.

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.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.2%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $61.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.7%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.08; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.8% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.2% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $948K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 45/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.