Skip to content
Napa Valley Presents at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Napa Valley Presents

We deliver strategic investments that amplify napa county as a hub for inspiring and innovative cultural experiences through live performance.

$69k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$23k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2024.

Arts & Culture$139kYouth Development$9kRecreation & Sports$9kEducation$6k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $46,930, the rows itemized in this filing. The $68,614 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $21,684 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $24k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $23k
$9,100
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NAPA VALLEY YOUTH SYMPHONY$22,830
NAPA HIGH SCHOOL CHORAL BOOSTERS$9,100
NAPA PARKS & REC FOUNDATION$9,000
THE WHITE BARN$6,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY23–24, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%THE WHITE BARN: $14k → 9%THE WHITE BARN: $6k → 9%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

57%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$93k · 4 repeat orgs$71k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +68% since the first grant, against +12% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
7

Total granted

$93k
$71k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+68%
+12%

Still filing today

100%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’23’24
Arts & CultureEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • NV
    Napa Valley Youth Symphony
    2× · 2023–2024 · $30k · revenue +20%
  • NP
    NAPA PARKS AND RECREATION FOUNDATION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $24k · revenue +267% · 51% of their budget
  • NH
    NAPA HIGH CHORAL BOOSTERS
    2× · 2023–2024 · $18k · revenue +68%

Funded once

  • NV
    NAPA VALLEY DISTRICT AUXILIARY SERVICES
    one grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +22%
  • EM
    E & M PRESENTS INC
    one grant, 2023 · $13k · revenue +2%
  • NV
    NAPA VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $9k · revenue +150%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Napa Valley Music Associates

Napa Valley Music Associates was founded in 1990 and incorporated as a California non-profit 501(c)(3) tax exempt corporation in 1991. Since then, we have enriched the Napa community and the greater San Francisco Bay Area with unique…

Unclassified
2
San Bernardino Valley Concert Association
—
3
The California Theatre of Santa Rosa

To champion the performing arts in Santa Rosa for all. To connect people with one another and with art that can enrich their lives. To embrace people from all backgrounds. To provide exceptional service to our resident companies and to…

Arts & Culture
4
San Marin High School Music Boosters

To support the performing arts and music programs at San Marin High School in Novato CA.

Education
5
North Canyon High School Band Booster Association dba Rattlers Music Parent Association

to support the music program at North Canyon High School

Education
6
Music in Place

Music in Place connects people and communities through music while curating high-quality experiences and supporting artists who create them.

Arts & Culture
7
North Bay Performing Arts

North Bay Performing Arts was founded by local dancers and choreographers who wanted to mentor and improve the future of local youth interested in the performing arts Membership in the organization is open to anyone interested in dance…

Arts & Culture
8
Northern California Childrens Chorus

NCCC is a choral music education program for 68 boys and girls, grades K-12 to train boys and girls to be singers, to read music and to be confident performers. Singers perform at concerts produced by our organization and at performances…

Arts & Culture
9
New Vintage Baroque Inc Dba Musica Sierra

New Vintage Baroque Inc's purpose is to enrich the cultural experience of the Lost Sierra with world-class, year-round performances and music education, accessible and affordable for all.

Arts & Culture
10
Cal Center Presents

Arts presenter serving the greater Reedsburg area.

Arts & Culture
11
Castro Valley Arts Foundation

To provide our students and community with artistic experiences that educate enrich and enterain by securing resources for the castro valley center for the arts.

—
12
Aliso Niguel High School

Booster club which provides financial support for the music program at Aliso Niguel High School, Aliso Viejo, California

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Napa High Choral Boosters; the most unlike its peers is Lucky Penny Productions Incorporated. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NAPA PARKS AND RECREATION FOUNDATION: $24,000 · OtherNAPA PARKS AND RECREATION FOUNDATIONNAPA VALLEY DISTRICT AUXILIARY SERVICES: $20,000 · OtherNAPA VALLEY DISTRICT AUXILIARY SERVICESNAPA VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $9,000 · OtherNAPA VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATIONLUCKY PENNY PRODUCTIONS INCORPORATED: $6,750 · OtherLUCKY PENNY PRODUCTIONS INCORPORATEDNapa Valley Youth Symphony: $30,480 · Arts & CultureNapa Valley Youth SymphonyE & M PRESENTS INC: $13,050 · Arts & CultureE & M PRESENTS INCLunchtime Productions Inc: $7,500 · Arts & CultureLunchtime Productions IncNAPA HIGH CHORAL BOOSTERS: $18,100 · EducationNAPA HIGH CHORAL …Vintage High School Music Boosters: $7,650 · EducationVintage High Scho…THE WHITE BARN: $20,000 · Human ServicesTHE WHITE BAR…CANDID: $6,750 · Philanthropy
Other$59,750Arts & Culture$51,030Education$25,750Human Services$20,000Philanthropy$6,750

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNapa Valley Youth Symphony: $30,480 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetNAPA PARKS AND RECREATION FOUNDATION: $24,000 over 2y, 51% of budgetTHE WHITE BARN: $20,000 over 2y, 25% of budgetNAPA VALLEY DISTRICT AUXILIARY SERVICES: $20,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetNAPA HIGH CHORAL BOOSTERS: $18,100 over 2y, 8.1% of budgetE & M PRESENTS INC: $13,050 over 1y, 22% of budgetNAPA VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $9,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetVintage High School Music Boosters: $7,650 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetLunchtime Productions Inc: $7,500 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetCANDID: $6,750 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Community Foundation …Napa Valley Festival …Amazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation of the Napa ValleyCA22× affinity8 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of the Napa Valley · Napa Valley Festival Association · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Napa Valley Presents funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Napa Valley Presents. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Napa Valley Presents?

    Find your warmest path to Napa Valley Presents through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 11 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Napa Valley Presents’ filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home