Taste of Vail Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841163714
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2019
Forms available
Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Vail, CO, USA
Phone
9703904800
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$135,251
Expenses
$149,628
Assets
$138,179
Liabilities
$140,274

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2019. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Greg Moffet (Vice President)
  • Chris Chantler (President)

People named in this filing

  • Jordan Harrill (Board Member)
  • Thomas J Armstrong (Treasurer)
  • Heather Price (Board Member)

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 2019. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To enhance Vail's image, position and reputation as a world class international resort with serious commitment to fine food and to promote recognition of the vail life style. The event offers a variety of experiences on the mountain, in restaurants and classrooms to enhance knowledge and enjoyment of food and wine.Form 990, Part VI, Section B, Line 11: Form 990 was reviewed by a board member prior to filing.Form 990, Part VI, Section C, Line 19: Paper copies of all documents are available upon request.

What it reported doing in 2019

Support of local charities through annual food and wine fundraising event.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.6%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90%; rating input score 90

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.6%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.92; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.02; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 26% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.6% of revenue deployed · 90% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $135K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.