Missouri Ems Agent Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264752355
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Jefferson City, MO, USA
Phone
5738932060
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ambulance, Emergency Medical Transport Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$825,287
Expenses
$606,187
Assets
$1,732,637
Liabilities
$231,063

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON WHITE (President)
  • MARK ALEXANDER (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • JASON WHITE (President)
  • GREG BROWN (Treasurer)
  • MARK ALEXANDER (Vice President)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The Missouri emergency medical services agent corporation is a not-for-profit corporation whose mission is to facilitate implementation of the Missouri ambulance service reimbursement allowance (ara) program which was enacted by the Missouri general assembly in 2009. This program allows the state of Missouri to collect a provider tax to enhance medicaid reimbursements to ambulance service providers in order to provide better health services to the citizens of the state.

What it reported doing in 2024

To enhance and facilitate mo healthnet (formally known as medicaid) funding for Missouri ambulance services in order to promote and maintain quality ambulance and emergency transportation services for the indigent.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.

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: 31
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 20.2%; rating input score 20
  • Program expense ratio: 59.5%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.5%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.86; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 40.5% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 24.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 20.2% of revenue deployed · 59.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.