Dentistry 4 Vets

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
832028179
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Monterey, CA, USA
Phone
8318839371
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,457,187
Expenses
$1,028,538
Assets
$1,338,031
Liabilities
$47,318

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEAN-JACQUES MURPHY (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • GEORGE YELLICH (SECRETARY, PRESIDENT EMERITUS)
  • KIRK JOHNSON (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PATRICIA YELLICH (EXECUTIVE DIR.): $174,500 total reported compensation
  • JOSHUA D SANCHEZ (TREASURER): $48,300 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 mission of the dentistry 4 vets is to provide high quality dentistry and dental implant care for the deserving veterans of monterey, santa cruz and san benito counties through volunteer efforts within the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Dentistry 4 vets will coordinate and provide dental care for qualifying individuals who are u.s. Veterans living in monterey, santa cruz and san benito counties in California. Before the clinic was opened, local dentists volunteered their time and use their facilities to provide the dental services. The clinic officially opened and is available to serve u.s. Veterans.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 67% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 26
  • Sustainability: 60
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $52.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: 29.4%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.3; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 33.4% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 34.2% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $853K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 9 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.