The Bee Cause Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463175971
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Isle of Palms, SC, USA
Phone
7034004473
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$704,153
Expenses
$599,466
Assets
$165,792
Liabilities
$82,122

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • TAMARA ENRIGHT (EXECUTIVE DI): $127,500 total reported compensation
  • EMILEE ELINGBURG (DIRECTOR OF): $72,500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To ensure future generations are stewards of the natural environment who understand, engage, and are inspired by the wonder of honey bees while being empowered to take action through careers in stem.

What it reported doing in 2025

The bee cause project has been servicing the community since 2013 connecting youth and adults across the united states and byond with the secret life of bees. The bee cause project has accomplished this by installing observation hives inside of schools as well as traditional hives in their gardens. The objectives are to utilize bee learning centers to: reconnect youth and adults with the natural world, provide an engaging and unique tool for teaching stem to students, empowering students to act as bee ambassadors, and teaching the importance every individual has to be stewards of nature in their community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 59% for direct work, and 41% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.4%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.9%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33.4%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.4% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $481K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $128K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.