Napa Chamber of Commerce Community Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161740434
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2015, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Napa, CA, USA
Phone
7072541146
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,451
Expenses
$31,679
Assets
$15,579
Liabilities
$11,250

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JERI HANSEN (SECRETARY)
  • MICHAEL BASAYNE (FINANCE DIRE)
  • CHRISTI COORS FICELI (CHAIR OF THE)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Support and advance the educational, cultural, and economic interests of the communities of the regional city of napa area, which are consistent with the napa chamber of commerce mission and vision.

What it reported doing in 2025

To develop informational programs for the community on topics of municipal and state strategic planning, as well as urban planning that helps to shape the city, the county and the state.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.2%; rating input score 92

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2,083.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.72; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.7% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $29K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.