San Mateo County Dental Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
941700499
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Carlos, CA, USA
Phone
6506371121
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$401,439
Expenses
$476,025
Assets
$2,299,194
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ZACHARY HELD DDS (President)
  • TYLER DAVIS DMD (President Elect)
  • OANH LE DDS (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • NAKIA BRANDT (Executive Dir.): $103,679 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To develop, nurture, and sustain a robust membership of dental professionals striving to improve conditions whitin their professional sphere, and an organizational structure which provides members with opportunities to exercise and/or cultivate leadership skills.

What it reported doing in 2025

Collegial, professional & community connection:- communications: the mouthpiece quarterly newsletter and smcds weekly update broadcast (these two in digital), event broadcast e-mails, email/social media alerts (as needed), www.smcds.com updating, facebook, twitter- patient referrals to member dentists and/or patient assistance programs via phone on your public line and website search engine- social/ networking events for new members, new dentists, and seniors- meet-up calendar- closer involvement with county education and government organizations- community outreach relationships, events, and volunteer opportunities- exposure to professional dental services and product providers in informative, non-competitive environments

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 94% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.1%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 83.6%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 80%; rating input score 80; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -18.6%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.83; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.8%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.1% of revenue deployed · 83.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 22 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompDisqualPersons column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.