Skip to content
California Dental Association at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

California Dental Association

The CALIFORNIA DENTAL ASSOCIATION is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.

$17k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$12k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Public Safety & Disaster$235kEducation$140kHealth$120kCivil Rights$22k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $12,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $16,910 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $4,910 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$12,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$231M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EQUALITY CALIFORNIA$12,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 90% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CALIFORNIA DENTAL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $100k → 12%EQUALITY CALIFORNIA: $12k → 14%HAWAII DENTAL ASSOCIATION: $10k → 9%NYU COLLEGE OF DENTISTRY: $10k → 17%TEXAS DENTAL ASSOCIATION: $40k → 10%NATIONAL ACADEMY OF MED HEALTH LITERACY ROUNDTABLE: $50k → 14%CALIFORNIA DENTAL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $75k → 12%EQUALITY CALIFORNIA: $10k → 14%NYU COLLEGE OF DENTISTRY: $10k → 17%NATIONAL ACADEMY OF MED HEALTH LITERACY ROUNDTABLE: $50k → 14%SACRAMENTO REGION COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25k → 12%NYU COLLEGE OF DENTISTRY: $10k → 17%THE CHILDREN'S DENTAL HEALTH: $20k → 14%SACRAMENTO REGION COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25k → 12%NYU COLLEGE OF DENTISTRY: $10k → 17%SACRAMENTO REGION COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25k → 12%SACRAMENTO REGION COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$337k · 4 repeat orgs$80k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +42% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
4

Total granted

$337k
$80k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
0%

Still filing today

100%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’23’24
Science & TechEducationCivil RightsOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES
    2× · 2018–2019 · $100k · revenue +21%
  • NY
    New York University
    4× · 2017–2023 · $40k · revenue +76%
  • EC
    EQUALITY CALIFORNIA
    2× · 2023–2024 · $22k · revenue +42%

Funded once

  • TD
    TEXAS DENTAL ASSOCIATION SMILES FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $40k · revenue -49%
  • CD
    CHILDREN'S DENTAL HEALTH PROJECT
    one grant, 2019 · $20k · revenue 0%
  • HD
    HAWAII DENTAL ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +14%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
California Dental Association

The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.

Community Improvement
2
International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology Inc

The organization provides peer reviewed scientific research and education in the field of biological dentistry.

Health
3
New York Dental Affiliates Pc

Operating as an integral part of the nyc health + hospitals ("h+h"), formerly the new york city health and hospitals corporation. nyda will further h+h's tax-exempt charitable, scientific, and educational purposes by enhancing the…

Health
4
American Academy of Dermatology Association Inc

To represent the interests of dermatologists and their patients. to influence and be a credible resource for public and private entities related to all policies and regulations that have the potential to affect the delivery of dermatologic…

Health
5
Delta Dental Fund

Delta dental fund's mission is to improve the oral health of the public and to advance dental science and the dental profession through research and education.

—
6
Oregon Dental Association

To advance the dental profession and promote the highest standard of oral health and oral healthcare.

—
7
New York State Dental Association

To encourage the improvement of the health of the public, to promote the art and science of dentistry, and to represent the interests of the members of the profession and the public which it serves.

—
8
Delta Dental of Washington

See schedule oddwa will revolutionize the oral health industry and improve overall health. this includes, but is not limited to, the following: to secure dental service for employer groups, individuals and their families; provide…

Health
9
American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons

Advancing, promoting and preserving the specialty of oral and maxillofacial surgery as well as the skills and professionalism of aaoms members to ensure patient access to safe and effective care.

—
10
American Academy of Dermatology Inc

To assure that dermatologists have access to the highest quality education, research and innovations in the field, and that patients and the public have access to the highest quality medical and surgical dermatologic care and to…

Health
11
Chicago Dental Society

The health of the public, to promote the art and science of dentistry and to represent the interest of the members of the profession and the public which it serves.

Community Improvement
12
Indiana Dental Association

The mission of the indiana dental association is to support dentists, to promote professionalism, and to improve oral health.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is California Dental Association Foundation; the most unlike its peers is New York University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 9 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CALIFORNIA DENTAL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $175,000 · Science & TechCALIFORNIA DENTAL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATIONNATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $100,000 · Science & TechNATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCESSacramento Region Community Foundation: $100,000 · PhilanthropySacramento Region Com…TEXAS DENTAL ASSOCIATION SMILES FOUNDATION: $40,000 · EducationTEXAS DENTAL ASSO…New York University: $40,000 · EducationNew York Universi…CHILDREN'S DENTAL HEALTH PROJECT: $20,000 · OtherHAWAII DENTAL ASSOCIATION: $10,000 · OtherCOLEGIO DE CIRUJANOS DENTISTAS DE PUERTO RICO: $10,000 · OtherEQUALITY CALIFORNIA: $22,000 · Civil Rights
Science & Tech$275,000Philanthropy$100,000Education$80,000Other$40,000Civil Rights$22,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCALIFORNIA DENTAL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $175,000 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetSacramento Region Community Foundation: $100,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $100,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTEXAS DENTAL ASSOCIATION SMILES FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 1y, 8.3% of budgetNew York University: $40,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetEQUALITY CALIFORNIA: $22,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCHILDREN'S DENTAL HEALTH PROJECT: $20,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetHAWAII DENTAL ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization California Dental Association funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from California Dental Association. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 9 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on California Dental Association’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home