Wine Origins Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
473580770
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025503749
Rating
42
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Boards of Trade

Reported finances

Revenue
$211,925
Expenses
$207,820
Assets
$57,800
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jacques-Olivier Pesme (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jacques-Olivier Pesme (Executive Director): $99,966 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Wine Origins Alliance began on July 26 2005 when eight wine regions signed the Joint Declaration to Protect Wine Place & Originin Napa Valley California. The Declaration a set of principles aimed at educating consumers and policymakers about the Importanceof location to winemaking continues to guide our work to this day. Today by educating the public the Alliance works to eliminate alltariffs on wine and non-tariff barriers to trade in wine including the lack of protection for wine region names.

What it reported doing in 2025

Welcomed one new wine region to coalition attended wine industry conferences and panel discussions hosted fly-in in geneva at the world trade organization wipo held press conference and reception at wineparis trade conference and hosted virtual and in-person strategy sessions for members

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 6th 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: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 1.9%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 48.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 38 of 40 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.