The James Mcmanus Fund of the Htfd Dental Society Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
066060434
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
South Windsor, CT, USA
Phone
8606441509
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$68,985
Expenses
$28,933
Assets
$2,251,385
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DR GARY GRILLI (TRUSTEE)
  • DR PAUL MCKENNA (TRUSTEE)
  • DR BRUCE NGHIEM (TRUSTEE)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Support projects for the advancement and benefit of the dental profession in particular and mankind in general.

What it reported doing in 2025

As a supporting organization, the james mcmanus fund donates to various charitable organizations that meet our mission of advancing the dental profession and providing dental care for individuals who might not be able to obtain it elsewhere. For example, the fund contributed to the Connecticut foundation for dental outreach, mission of mercy, which provides free dental care to underserved patients who have limited access to oral health care. It also donated to the Connecticut dental assistants association whos mission is to advance the careers of dental assistants and to enhance the delivery of quality dental health care to the public.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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: 30
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 24.9%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 48.4%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 42.9%; rating input score 43; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 58.1%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 77.81; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.1% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 24.9% of revenue deployed · 48.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $14K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 43/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.