Skip to content
Delta Dental of Pennsylvania at a glance

· Public charity

Delta Dental of Pennsylvania

To advance dental health and access through exceptional dental benefits, service, technology and professional support.

$2.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$2.2M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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.

Health$23MEducation$665kPhilanthropy$397kHuman Services$70k
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $2,345,204, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,397,937 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $52,733 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $40k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $68k
  • $250k+1 grant · $2.2M
$15,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$468M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DELTA DENTAL COMMUNITY CARE FOUNDATION$2,230,035
AMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION$67,669
PEYTON WALKER FOUNDATION$15,000
BETHESDA MISSION WOMEN'S SHELTER$15,000
FOUNDATION FOR ENHANCING COMMUNITIES$10,000
SPECIAL OLYMPICS PENNSYLVANIA$7,500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–24, $160k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%BETHESDA MISSION WOMEN'S SHELTER: $15k → 12%BETHESDA MISSION WOMEN'S SHELTER: $15k → 12%BETHESDA MISSION WOMEN'S SHELTER: $15k → 12%BETHESDA MISSION WOMEN'S SHELTER: $15k → 12%THE FOUNDATION FOR ENHANCING COMMUNITIES: $20k → 12%THE FOUNDATION FOR ENHANCING COMMUNITIES: $13k → 12%THE FOUNDATION FOR ENHANCING COMMUNITIES: $13k → 12%THE FOUNDATION FOR ENHANCING COMMUNITIES: $11k → 12%FOUNDATION FOR ENHANCING COMMUNITIES: $10k → 12%THE FOUNDATION FOR ENHANCING COMMUNITIES: $10k → 12%THE FOUNDATION FOR ENHANCING COMMUNITIES: $6k → 12%A GIFT OF SMILES INC: $10k → 12%A GIFT OF SMILES INC: $8k → 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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$23M · 10 repeat orgs$73k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
8

Total granted

$23M
$73k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+91%

Still filing today

80%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthPhilanthropyHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • DD
    DELTA DENTAL COMMUNITY CARE FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $22M · revenue +84%
  • BM
    BETHESDA MISSION OF HARRISBURG INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $60k · revenue +48%
  • PW
    PEYTON WALKER FOUNDATION
    3× · 2021–2024 · $40k · revenue +288%

Funded once

  • TC
    THE CHILDRENS ORAL HEALTH INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue -82%
  • OI
    OPPORTUNITIES INDUSTRIALIZATION CENTER INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue +105%
  • V5
    VARIOUS 5000 INDIVIDUALLY
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
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
Dental Patient Safety Foundation
Health
2
Global Dental Access Days Foundation

At the gdad foundation, we believe that everyone deserves access to quality dental care and education, regardless of their circumstances. dental health is a critical component of overall well-being, and our mission is to provide charitable…

Health
3
Sadler Health Center Corporation

To advance the health of our community by providing inclusive, high quality and compassionate care.

Health
4
Oral Health International Foundation
—
5
Oral Healthcare for All Foundations
—
6
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

The children's hospital of philadelphia, the oldest hospital in the united states dedicated exclusively to pediatrics, strives to be the world leader in the advancement of health care for children by integrating excellent patient care,…

Health
7
Ann Silverman Community Health Clinic

The ann silverman community health clinic provides free medical and dental care, behavioral health and social services to low-income, uninsured residents of bucks county.

Health
8
Wayne Memorial Community Health Centers

Wayne Memorial Community Health Centers creates and sustains healthy rural communities by providing accessible, high quality medical, dental and behavioral health care for all, while recognizing and addressing other factors that influence…

Health
9
California Dental Association Foundation

The foundation's mission is to improve the oral health of all californians by supporting the dental profession and its efforts to meet community needs.

Science & Tech
10
Smiles for Everyone Foundation

To deliver smiles for everyone by providing free dental care to those in need, both at home and around the world.

International
11
Smile 180 Foundation

Our mission is to provide supporting, sponsoring, and funding programs and initiatives that promote oral healthcare and educational programs to clincs and hospitals that extend the benefits of dentistry to the indigent and other groups…

Health
12
Healthlink Dental Clinic Inc

To improve the overall health of qualified low-wage earning adults in bucks and montgomery counties by providing free preventative and restorative dental services and oral health education.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sibley Memorial Hospital Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Delta Dental Community Care Foundation. 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

18 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 18 of the 22 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
14/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DELTA DENTAL COMMUNITY CARE FOUNDATION: $22,184,713 · PhilanthropyDELTA DENTAL COMMUNITY CARE FOUNDATION+5 more: $461,991 · PhilanthropyTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $650,000 · Education+1 more: $5,000 · EducationTHE FOUNDATION FOR ENHANCING COMMUNITIES: $69,520 · Human ServicesBETHESDA MISSION OF HARRISBURG INC: $60,000 · Human ServicesA GIFT OF SMILES: $30,500 · Human ServicesCOOL CARS FOR KIDS INC: $70,000 · HealthTHE CHILDRENS ORAL HEALTH INSTITUTE: $20,000 · HealthAMERICA'S DENTISTS CARE FOUNDATION: $7,619 · HealthSIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $5,000 · HealthSQUIRREL HILL HEALTH CENTER: $5,000 · HealthMISC SMALL DONATIONS LESS THAN 5000: $41,742 · OtherOPPORTUNITIES INDUSTRIALIZATION CENTER INC: $15,000 · OtherSPECIAL OLYMPICS PENNSYLVANIA INC: $15,000 · OtherVARIOUS 5000 INDIVIDUALLY: $10,475 · OtherSISTERS OF THE HUMILITY OF MARY: $10,000 · OtherDOWNTOWN DAILY BREAD: $5,000 · Other
Philanthropy$22,646,704Education$655,000Human Services$160,020Health$107,619Other$97,217

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 budgetDELTA DENTAL COMMUNITY CARE FOUNDATION: $22,184,713 over 8y, 16% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $650,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INC: $310,991 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetCOOL CARS FOR KIDS INC: $70,000 over 7y, 36% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR ENHANCING COMMUNITIES: $69,520 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetBETHESDA MISSION OF HARRISBURG INC: $60,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR THE CAROLINAS: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPEYTON WALKER FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 3y, 3.6% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA PARTNERSHIP FOR CULTURE HEALTH AND EDUCATION INC: $36,000 over 5y, 5.8% of budgetA GIFT OF SMILES: $30,500 over 3y, 89% of budgetSNEAKERS FOR SOLDIERS INC: $25,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetOPPORTUNITIES INDUSTRIALIZATION CENTER INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS PENNSYLVANIA INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICA'S DENTISTS CARE FOUNDATION: $7,619 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetSIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE VISTA FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSQUIRREL HILL HEALTH CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Upmc Pinnacle Hospita…Delta Dental Communit…Schwab-Silfen Foundat…United Way of the Cap…The Foundation for En…American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Upmc Pinnacle HospitalsPA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Upmc Pinnacle Hospitals · Delta Dental Community Care Foundation · Schwab-Silfen Foundation · United Way of the Capital Region · The Foundation for Enhancing Communities · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%23%51%90%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
    2get no government money at all
    3report 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, FY20–25
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Delta Dental of Pennsylvania?

    Find your warmest path to Delta Dental of Pennsylvania through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 22 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 Delta Dental of Pennsylvania’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