National Association of Dental Plans

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752801959
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
9724586998
Rating
53
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,348,901
Expenses
$4,020,538
Assets
$6,343,307
Liabilities
$2,037,992

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHAEL ADELBERG (Executive Dir.): $439,469 total reported compensation
  • TIMOTHY BROWN (DEPUTY EXEC. DIR.): $191,606 total reported compensation
  • GERARD BERGGREN (DIR. RESEARCH/INFO): $163,493 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

NADPs mission is to promote and advance the dental benefits industry to improve consumer access to affordable, quality dental care. NADP was originally founded in 1989 to serve the dental HMO industry. The organization moved its headquarters to Dallas in 1994 and a year later broadened its membership to include DPPOs. Expansion of its membership base continued in succeeding years with the addition of dental discount plans in 1995 and indemnity programs in 2001. For the past decade NADP has served as the representative and recognized resource of the dental benefits industry. Our members include national commercial carriers, regional and single state plans, companies organized as not-for-profit service plans, interested individual members, dental practice management companies and supporting member organizations that provide products & services to the dental benefits industry. Our four major programs are research, education, government relations, and collaboration.

What it reported doing in 2025

COLLABORATION - NADPs role under collaboration is serving on various national and international groups that are involved in the setting of standards and transaction guidelines for the dental benefits industry in the areas of procedure codes (CDT), diagnosis codes (SNODENT), and EHR reporting (ICD), quality measures, and electronic data interchange for claims processing, electronic funds transfer and electronic health records.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 96% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 95
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 42
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.6%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.58; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $439K · 16 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $509K reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.