Northwest Wine Benefit Foundation DBA Auction of Washington Wines

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
911550425
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
2067410212
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,190,559
Expenses
$3,291,673
Assets
$2,190,316
Liabilities
$1,222,195

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jamie Peha (Executive Director)
  • Stacy Lill (President)
  • Heather Andersen (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jamie Peha (Executive Director): $288,000 total reported compensation
  • Laura Kleinhofs (Business Manager): $147,811 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Auction of Washington Wines is the wine industry's annual gift to communities across the state, benefiting uncompensated care for patients and families at Seattle Childrens Hospital and Viticulture and Enology research in Washington State.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Allen Shoup Memorial Fellowship was established in 2023 to fund an award available to one writer annually with an immersive experience in Washington wine country. The award will include a two-week research itinerary with vineyard and winery visits, meetings with key growers, vintners, educators and industry representatives.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.2%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 67.6%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.2%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.67; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.2%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.2% of revenue deployed · 67.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $288K · 18 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.