Napa County Farm Bureau

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941165038
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Napa, CA, USA
Phone
7072245403
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,159,442
Expenses
$1,023,605
Assets
$2,138,216
Liabilities
$99,517

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DON MUNK (PRESIDENT)
  • PETER NISSEN (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • DON MUNK (PRESIDENT)
  • PETER NISSEN (PRESIDENT)
  • ERIC POOLER (VICE PRESIDE)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To ensure the proper political, social, and economic climate for the continuation of a strong, viable and sustainable agricultural economy. This is done through advocacy and education in order to preserve and protect the agricultural land and other natural resources that providde a high quality of life for all rural and urban citizens of napa county.

What it reported doing in 2024

To help the general public gain a greater awarness of the role of agriculture in society and the economy so they may become citizens who support wise agriculture policies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 90% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 97.8%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.7%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.09; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 38.5% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.9% of revenue deployed · 97.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.