Napa Valley Festival Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264008029
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Walnut Creek, CA, USA
Phone
8883376272
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Cultural, Ethnic Awareness

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,393,000
Expenses
$12,886,913
Assets
$19,039,373
Liabilities
$1,721,827

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

Leadership & pay

35 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RICHARD WALKER (PRESIDENT / CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • RICHARD WALKER (PRESIDENT / CEO): $616,390 total reported compensation
  • CHARLES LETOURNEAU (VICE PRES., DIRECTOR ARTISTIC): $243,000 total reported compensation
  • Tessa Edwards (SR DIR,GROW. PHIL.(TERM 12/24)): $188,800 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Napa valley festival association offers programs that enrich the economic and cultural vitality of the region and make the arts accessible to all. The association presents performances at iconic napa valley venues and inspiring educational programs year-round.

What it reported doing in 2024

Cultural community events: napa valley festival association enriches the cultural and economic vitality of the napa valley through food, wine, wellness, and hospitality events in collaboration with more than 100 partner wineries, restaurants, resorts, and institutions. Encouraging inclusiveness, diversity and innovation, and leveraging music's unparalleled ability to bring people together and to provide a sense of belonging, napa valley festival association plays a vital role in building a healthy, vibrant community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 66.6%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 90.7%; rating input score 91; 26th 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -37.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.48; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 66.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $8.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $616K · 35 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $1.4M reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 filed related-organization links
  • 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 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.