Stockdale Volunteer Ambulance Service

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
742480980
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2013
Forms available
Form 990 2013
Location
Stockdale, TX, USA
Phone
8303913448
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Ambulance, Emergency Medical Transport Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$231,167
Expenses
$163,058
Assets
$17,970
Liabilities
$31,093

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2013. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID RICE JR (President)
  • ROGER ADAMS (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • DAVID RICE SR (BOARD MEMBER)
  • EDWIN BAKER (BOARD MEMBER)
  • RICHARD JACKSON (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2013. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organizations program service is to provide emergency medical and ambulance services to all individuals who require such services in the greater stockdale, Texas area.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 68% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.9%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 80.2%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.5%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.73; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.9% of revenue deployed · 80.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 10 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $131K 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
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.