Minnesota Dental Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411927049
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6127678400
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Scholarships, Student Financial Aid Services, Awards

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$394,102
Expenses
$663,250
Assets
$2,122,686
Liabilities
$316

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR STEPHEN LITTON (PRESIDENT)
  • CARMELO CINQUEONCE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MN DEN)

Highest reported compensation

  • CARMELO CINQUEONCE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MN DEN): $331,846 total reported compensation
  • VICKI CAPISTRANT (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $134,546 total reported compensation
  • DAWN JENSEN (DIRECTOR OF MEMBERSHIP): $125,527 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Minnesota dental foundation's mission is to initiate and support programs that provide dental services to underserved populations and communities; encourage and support volunteerism within the profession; and promote careers in dentistry, especially in underserved areas.

What it reported doing in 2024

Two significant programs help the underserved access free dental care. The Minnesota mission of mercy project provides free dental care to patients over a weekend visiting a different city in Minnesota every other year. The donated dental services program provides elderly, disabled or medically fragile individuals who can not afford needed dentistry with free dental care in private dental offices throughout the year. Another smaller program is the Minnesota heroes orthodontic program which provides free orthodontic care to children and spouses of gold star families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.3%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $30.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 85.8%; rating input score 86; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -68.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.2; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $605K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $332K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.