Delta Dental of Washington

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
910621480
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
Group Plans Prospective & Current Members: 1-800-554-1907; Individual & Family P
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Group Health Practice (Health Maintenance Organizations)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,834,429,835
Expenses
$1,820,098,457
Assets
$258,655,741
Liabilities
$91,716,979

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MITCHKE MARK (PRESIDENT & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • ABDELLATIF VANETTA (PRES/CEO ARCORA FDN)

Highest reported compensation

  • MITCHKE MARK (PRESIDENT & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $4,693,818 total reported compensation
  • BERG BRADLEY (SENIOR VP, CHIEF ADMIN OFFICER): $1,460,001 total reported compensation
  • RUTHERFORD EVE M (CHAIR - BRD. & DDS FEES): $1,347,828 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Your Smile Can Make a Difference. We have a responsibility and platform to transform the oral health industry to ensure all people have good oral health, with no one left behind. We recognize that systemic inequities are real and exist in oral health; we must listen, seek to understand, and take actions to unlock our potential to drive change. We are committed to confronting and eliminating inequity throughout our company and to working courageously with our partners and our communities to be a champion for diversity, equity, and inclusion in Washington. Our Mission We disrupt, transform and revolutionize the oral health industry in order to remove barriers to health care and improve oral health.

What it reported doing in 2024

1. Water fluoridation is the most important step a community can take to improve the oral health of all residents. The foundation promotes legislation to encourage fluoridation, provides assistance to groups who are committed to bringing the benefits of fluoride to their communities and helps prevent rollbacks in existing fluoridated communities. Since 2001, over 646,000 washingtonians receive the health benefits associated with fluoridated water as a result of the foundation's work.2. Assisting the work of the foundation are ddwa employees volunteering their time. Ddwa enables all employees to engage with the public regarding oral health through the use of two volunteer days per year. The smilemobile program offers volunteer opportunities in assisting with patient recruitment and registration while in a community. The mobile dental van staffed with dental professionals, travels the state of wa providing preventive, restorative and emergent dental care to children, youth and pregnant/postpartum people with a focus on black, indigenous, people of color in underserved areas of the state. Since 1995, the program has examined over 53,000 patients.3. Ddwa matches donations made by employees to non-profit organizations with official IRS 501(c)(3) status, although the following organizations/events are not eligible for matching: churches, political campaigns/organizations, capital funding, fraternal/labor organizations, trips/tours, mass mailings, organizations/groups that discriminate for any reason including, but not limited to, race, color, religion, creed, age, sex, sexual orientation or national origin.4. Ddwa provided $287,775 to uw school of dentistry to cover the Washington state department of oral health dental exams for its graduating class.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 96% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.5%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 95.5%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97%; rating input score 97; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 54.5%; rating input score 55; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.8%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 94.5% of revenue deployed · 95.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.7B in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $4.7M · 26 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $40.4M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 183 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 47 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.