Napa Valley Education Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680005743
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Napa, CA, USA
Phone
7072001224
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,236,852
Expenses
$2,855,716
Assets
$8,417,442
Liabilities
$937,732

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JENNIFER GIBB (President)
  • HOLLY KOFORD (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER STEWART (Executive Dir.): $173,784 total reported compensation
  • RACHEL LUPPENS (DIR OF DEVELOPMENT): $118,773 total reported compensation
  • KRISTIN ANDERSON (PROGRAM DIRECTOR): $115,446 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule o

What it reported doing in 2024

Health and wellnessthe wellness program provides community funding and support to ensure that all students in need of mental health support have access to it on-campus and for no cost. The program partners with schools and nonprofit agencies to fund mental health staff and services to provide a comprehensive support system that is easily accessible to all students. Annual mental health screening and on-campus wellness centers further connect students to services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 77
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 75
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.2%; rating input score 27
  • Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $28.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 65.3%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.95; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 26.3% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26.6% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.2% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 11 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.