Bitcoin Policy Institute

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
881567390
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
2022137051
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,320,088
Expenses
$1,942,828
Assets
$1,838,491
Liabilities
$13,941

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GRANT MCCARTY (CO-CEO)
  • DAVID ZELL (CO-CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • GRANT MCCARTY (CO-CEO): $165,750 total reported compensation
  • DAVID ZELL (CO-CEO): $165,750 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Bitcoin policy institute (bpi) is a non-profit, non-partisan organization that conducts research on bitcoin and emerging technologies, provides charitable legal support to defend bitcoin users and developers' rights, and educates the public and policymakers to protect civil liberties in the digital age.

What it reported doing in 2024

P2p rights fund the organization operates the p2p rights fund as a public-interest legal and educational program that advances its charitable mission to protect civil liberties and promote lawful technological innovation. The fund provides critical resources to subsidize defense counsel and sponsor amicus briefs in pivotal civil and criminal cases where the outcome is likely to shape the legal treatment of open-source, non-custodial bitcoin tools; strategically supports and finances affirmative impact litigation in carefully selected cases to establish clear legal precedents for the benefit of the public; and offers free or subsidized regulatory guidance to entities developing open-source software so they can comply with existing law. These activities are undertaken on a public-interest and financial-need basis, and are designed to assist courts and regulators, protect constitutional rights, and improve legal clarity for all participants in the ecosystem.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 51.4%; rating input score 51
  • Program expense ratio: 87.9%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $51.58 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: 41.5%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 96.1% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 95.6% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 100.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 51.4% of revenue deployed · 87.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $166K · 6 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $787K reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.