St Charles County Emergency Services Aso

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205470675
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Cottleville, MO, USA
Phone
6364476655
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ambulance, Emergency Medical Transport Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$148,975
Expenses
$165,069
Assets
$219,975
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOM VINEYARD (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • STEVEN MOSHER (DIRECTOR)
  • DAVID SCHMIDT (TREASURER/DIRECTOR)
  • SKIP STEPHENS (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

Promotion of goodwill and cooperation among all fire districts and ambulance districts in st. Charles county. Promotion of safe working conditions for all fire and ems personel in st charles county. Improved fire protection and ems delivery for citizens, businesses, and industries through unity of the fire and ems officials. Promote and enhance standardized joint education for firefighters and ems personnel. Educate the public concerning emergency services in st charles county.

What it reported doing in 2025

Improved fire protection and safe working conditions for fire fighters and ems personnel in st charles county

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 72% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.4%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.8%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.33; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $162K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.