Project Apis M Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208345956
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Torrey, UT, USA
Phone
9162873035
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,303,375
Expenses
$2,313,715
Assets
$2,019,819
Liabilities
$215,044

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DANIELLE DOWNEY (EXECUTIVE DI): $168,115 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization's mission is to fund and direct research and efforts to improve honey bee health and vitality.

What it reported doing in 2024

Seeds for bees seeds for bees encourages the use of cover crops to increase the density, diversity, and duration of bee forage in California orchards, farms, and vineyards, while improving soil health. The seed mixes available through seeds for bees are designed to bloom at critical times of the year when natural forage is scarce but managed and native bees are active. Seeds for bees serves the needs of bees, beekeepers, and growers, increasing sustainability of pollination and agriculture. In fy25, the seeds for bees program worked with 414 California growers to plant over 26,000 acres of cover crop.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 73% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.7%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 82.6%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $20.63 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 81.1%; rating input score 81; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 7.3%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.7% of revenue deployed · 82.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $168K · 13 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 14 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.