SommFoundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593770368
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Napa, CA, USA
Phone
3035880606
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$402,470
Expenses
$440,458
Assets
$189,912
Liabilities
$9,100

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Carlin Karr (Director)
  • Shilah Salmon (Director)
  • Thomas Price (Chairman)

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

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the sommfoundation is to provide scholarships to encourage improved standards of beverage knowledge and service in hotels and restaurants. The sommfoundation will fund the educational endeavors of those individuals in the service of wine, spirits, and other alcoholic beverages who are seeking to reach the highest level of proficiency and knowledge in the profession by pursuing the educational coursework necessary to attain the status of master sommelier.

What it reported doing in 2024

Scholarship grants - the purpose of the sommfoundation is to provide scholarships to encourage improved standards of beverage knowledge and service in hotels and restaurants. The sommfoundation will fund the educational endeavors of those individuals in the service of wine, spirits, and other alcoholic beverages who are seeking to reach the highest level of proficiency and knowledge in the profession by pursuing the educational coursework necessary to attain the status of master sommelier.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 61% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 44
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 46.9%; rating input score 47
  • Program expense ratio: 44.9%; rating input score 45
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.4%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -12.5% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.5% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -14.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 46.9% of revenue deployed · 44.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 10 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $198K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 23 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 47/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 45/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.