Dutchess County Dental Society Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 146026940
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Poughkeepsie, NY, USA
- Phone
- 8454623631
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $13,670
- Expenses
- $16,503
- Assets
- $64,833
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Dr Jeffrey Valenti (President)
People named in this filing
- Dr Jeffrey Valenti (President)
- Dr Emily Ennabi (Secretary)
- Dr Richard Rosenbloom (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The dutchess county dental society's objective is to enable members to achieve in their profession through study and research; to promote community responsibility and good fellowship; to create a forum for the discussion of issues facing the profession of dentistry, to represent the interests of dentists of dutchess county, and to otherwise provide for the needs of the membership.
What it reported doing in 2025
Continuing education to advance their profession by (1) hosting an annual all day conference featuring lectures from renowned experts in the various fields / techniques of dentistry, as well as vendors and suppliers displaying the latest products, (2) monthly meetings that feature mini-lectures and forums to discuss recent trends and techniques in the profession, and (3) an electronic monthly bulletin that contains informative articles of concern to the profession.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -20.7%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.93; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: -14.7% per year; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3.8% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.