Napa Valley Vintners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941496715
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
St Helena, CA, USA
Phone
7079633388
Rating
47
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,569,752
Expenses
$6,576,423
Assets
$13,472,451
Liabilities
$2,082,820

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Linda Reiff (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Linda Reiff (President & CEO): $718,528 total reported compensation
  • Steven Tradewell (CFO): $379,810 total reported compensation
  • Stacey Dolan Capitani (VP of Marketing): $350,254 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ensure the economic viability and sustainability of the Napa Valley appellation through marketing, promotional, educational and training programs, work on critical industry issues, and enhance the well-being of the Napa County Community.

What it reported doing in 2024

International Marketing includes all marketing and promotional activities conducted in support of wine exports to foreign markets. Certain International Program expenditures qualify for reimbursement under federal grants. As fiscal agent for the Organization, The Wine Institute and the United States Department of Agriculture Commodity Credit Corporation funds these disbursements and collects the corresponding government funding. The remaining International Program expenses are paid by the Organization and are partially funded through member program fees and dues.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.1%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.05; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $719K · 19 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $708K reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.