Red Mountain Ava Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261934728
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2020
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Benton City, WA, USA
Phone
5094264495
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$91,858
Expenses
$91,281
Assets
$96,432
Liabilities
$13,738

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TIM HIGHTOWER (PRESIDENT)
  • KATHY CORTEMBOS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ALICIA BROWN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • WILL HOPPES (DIRECTOR)
  • MAGGIE HEDGES (DIRECTOR)
  • MELLISSA WHITAKER (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To have the red mountain ava be recognized as one of the great wine growing regions of the world.

What it reported doing in 2020

In 2020, the rmavaa sought to host three taste red mountain events, educational tasting experiences for trade, media, and consumers in bellevue, olympia and benton city. Taste red mountain, previously a private tasting for wine buyers in restaurants, wine shops, etc., was to be expanded from one market to three and was to host trade, media and a ticketed event for general consumers. Due to covid-19, all events were mandated to be cancelled. In lieu of hosting in-person events, the rmavaa hosted several small educational virtual events, open to the public and directed efforts into organizational aspects. In 2020, the rmavaa updated it's mission statement and created a new vision statement, along with methods & objectives. The rmavaa also invested in materials to help market the region, including a large photoshoot on red mountain ava during harvest and winter 2020.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.6%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.5%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.