Petaluma Gap Winegrowers Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208224284
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Petaluma, CA, USA
Phone
4156084175
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$109,214
Expenses
$106,875
Assets
$77,275
Liabilities
$47

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HEIDI BRIDENHAGEN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHERYL QUIST (EXECUTIVE DI): $62,258 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote the growers and vintners of the petaluma gap and foster the production of high-quality wines crafted from grapes grown in the petaluma gap american viticultural area (ava). Cultivate positive relationships with the community by elevating awareness of growing and winemaking practices and an understanding of the winegrowers commitment to respect and protect the land. Continue to advance petalumas 150+ year heritage as a successful wine- producing center.

What it reported doing in 2025

Hosted its annual members meeting hosted its wind to wine festival conducted a wine cruise with ama waterways/expedia cruise lines conducted two technical seminars for its growers & winemakers hosted periodic consumer events at local restaurants published monthly newsletters to its list of 1,800+ followers posted 65 entries on social media at the close of 2025, the alliance had 71 industry members and 49 consumer memebers

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 74% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 2.1%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 58.3%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 88% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $96K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.