The Association of Zinfandel Advocates

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943151462
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Rough Ready, CA, USA
Phone
5302744900
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$573,059
Expenses
$624,867
Assets
$285,146
Liabilities
$312,187

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRANDON LAPIDES (PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA ROBINSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • REBECCA ROBINSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $188,620 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Zinfandel advocates & producers (zap) is a membership based organization that advances knowledge and appreciation for american zinfandel and its unique place in our culture and history.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provided educational programs to advance the knowledge of the zinfandel experience, which was held in january 2025 & june 2025. It was a three-day event attended by over 500 people and a one-day tasting. Activities included educational seminars, wine tasting, and interacting with winemakers. Additional events were held with a focus on zinfandel education. The organization conducted wine country tours and seminars. The organization also continued a zinfandel live program to increase visitation to wineries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 23
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 27.3%; rating input score 27
  • Program expense ratio: 25.2%; rating input score 25
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: -9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.09; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.2%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 27.3% of revenue deployed · 25.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $157K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $189K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 27/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.