Winegrowers of Napa Valley

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680398209
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Napa, CA, USA
Phone
7077384847
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$230,250
Expenses
$245,047
Assets
$397,173
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kevin LeMasters (President)
  • Russ Weis (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Michelle Benvenuto (Executive Dir.): $179,042 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Winegrowers of napa valley is a nonprofit organization whose principal mission is to advance policy that preserves sustainable agriculture as the highest and best use of the natural resources of napa county while protecting the ability of wineries to produce, market and sell wine.

What it reported doing in 2024

Winegrowers of napa valley provides an essential voice to napa county's political dialogue. The organization is commiteed to social and political action that preserve and enhance the environment, maintain the economic viability of agriculture, and present a model for social responsibility. During the fiscal year, these actions included attending county and community meetings, discussing unintended consequences of potential regulations, and engaging the local community in the discussion by posting on our website and utlizing social media.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

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: 77
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 38
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.62; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 73.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -25.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.7% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 7 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 9 of 10 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 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 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.