Aapi Food and Wine

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
994998234
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Sherwood, OR, USA
Phone
9514737745
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$97,670
Expenses
$64,918
Assets
$32,787
Liabilities
$35

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LOIS CHO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • JOSHUA CHANG (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KRISTY NGUYEN (DIRECTOR)
  • LOIS CHO (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • SYLVIA CHOI (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Advance diversity in the wine industry by attracting global attention to Oregon's aapi winemaking and culinary talent, empower the aapi individuals that make the state diverse and delicious, educate the public with non-traditional food and wine pairings, and support community organizations that promote diversity in the food and wine industry and beyond.

What it reported doing in 2024

Aapi food & wine was founded with the mission to celebrate the diverse wine and culinary scene that makes the pacific northwest, particularly Oregon, so unique. The annual aapi food & wine festival (with the goals of uplifting aapi food and wine businesses, promoting diversity and educating the public regarding non-traditional food and wine pairings) featured trailblazing aapi owned wineries and acclaimed aapi chefs over two days.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Transfer-based 990-EZ. The 990-EZ reports grants or member benefits, but it does not separate enough spending to show the nonprofit’s full delivery mix.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 4
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 59
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 6.9%; rating input score 7
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 33.5%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 6.9% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.