Valley Rescue Squad Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237167704
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2012
Forms available
Form 990 2012
Location
Hancock, VT, USA
Phone
8027674163
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Ambulance, Emergency Medical Transport Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$255,238
Expenses
$243,509
Assets
$152,295
Liabilities
$154,521

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2012. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Emergency Medical Assistance

What it reported doing in 2012

Emergency medical and ambulance assistance provided to those in need of service within the white river valley towns of rochester, hancock, and granville

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 61
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 11th 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: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 4.6%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.63; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.01; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $244K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $17K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2011 to 2012
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.

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: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.