Southern York County Emergency Medical Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472803966
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fawn Grove, PA, United States
Phone
717.673.0793
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ambulance, Emergency Medical Transport Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,756,371
Expenses
$1,659,037
Assets
$2,031,595
Liabilities
$153,468

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SCOTT TOWSON (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • LAURA TAYLOR (CHIEF)
  • SCOTT TOWSON (PRESIDENT)
  • JEFF GRIFFITH (VICE PRESIDE)

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

Our mission is to provide and deliver high quality, professional mobile health services. Click the button below to view an informational PowerPoint about Southern York County EMS. We want to educate and inform the community on our services, and who makes it possible for our organization to provide and deliver high quality, professional mobile health services. View Power Point.

What it reported doing in 2024

To provide and deliver high quality professional mobile health services.

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

SUPPORTED - 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 revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.8%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 93.6%; rating input score 94
  • 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.5%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.22; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 92.8% of revenue deployed · 93.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.