Mission: SEE PART III, LINE 1
Project BEE is a 501(c)(3) organization, with an IRS ruling year of 1965, and donations are tax-deductible.
Is this your nonprofit? Access the Nonprofit Portal to submit data and download your rating toolkit.
Contact Information
URL not available
400 E CENTRAL AVE STE 302
Minot ND 58701-4019
Encompass Rating System by Charity Navigator
Overall Score
98
out of 100
This charity's score is a passing score.
This overall score is calculated from multiple beacon scores: 35% Finance & Accountability, 50% Impact & Results, 10% Leadership & Adaptability, and 5% Culture & Community
Learn about the Encompass Rating System: Overview | FAQ | Release Notes
Finance & Accountability
This score provides an assessment of a nonprofit's financial health (stability, efficiency and sustainability) and its commitment to governance practices and policies.
Finance & Accountability Score
95
out of 100
The score earned by Project BEE is a passing score
This V5 of the Finance & Accountability Score provides a baseline measure of an organization’s health including the indicators listed in the report below.
This score represents Form 990 data from 2019, the latest year electronically filed and published by the IRS.
Finance & Accountability Report
95
of 100 points
This beta feature is currently viewable only on desktop or tablet screens. Check back later for updates.
Program Expense Ratio
77.61%
Higher effect on score
More data
The Program Expense Ratio is determined by Program Expenses divided by Total Expense (average of most recent three 990s). This measure reflects the percent of its total expenses a charity spends on the programs and services it exists to deliver.
Program Expense Percentage | Amount of Credit Received |
|---|---|
| 70% or higher | Full Credit |
| 60% - 69.9% | Partial Credit |
| Below 50% | Zero Points for Both Program Expense percentage AND Liabilities to Assets |
Source: IRS Form 990
Board Composition
10/10 Independent
Higher effect on score
Charity Navigator looks for at least 3 board members, with more than 50% of those members identified as independent (not salaried).
The presence of an independent governing body is strongly recommended by many industry professionals to allow for full deliberation and diversity of thinking on governance and other organizational matters.
Source: IRS Form 990
Independent Audit or Financial Review
No review needed due to small charity size
No effect on score
An Audit, Review, or Compilation provides important information about financial accountability and accuracy. Organizations are scored based on their Total Revenue Amount:
Total Revenue Amount | Expectation to Receive Credit |
|---|---|
| $1 million or higher | Expected to complete an audit |
| $500,000 - $1 million | Expected to complete an audit, review, or compilation |
| Less than $500,000 | No expectation (removed from scoring methodology) |
Source: IRS Form 990
Liabilities to Assets Ratio
42.43%
Lower effect on score
The Liabilities to Assets Ratio is determined by Total Liabilities divided by Total Assets (most recent 990). This ratio is an indicator of an organization’s solvency and/or long-term sustainability.
Liabilities to Assets Ratio | Amount of Credit Received |
|---|---|
| Less than 50% | Full Credit |
| 50% - 59.9% | Partial Credit |
| 60% or more | No Credit |
Source: IRS Form 990
Website
Missing
Lower effect on score
Charity Navigator looks for a website on the Form 990 as an accountability and transparency metric.
Nonprofits act in the public trust and reporting publicly on activities is an important component.
Source: IRS Form 990
Conflict of Interest Policy
Listed
Lower effect on score
Charity Navigator looks for the existence of a conflict of interest policy on the Form 990 as an accountability and transparency measure.
This policy protects the organization and by extension those it serves, when it is considering entering into a transaction that may benefit the private interest of an officer, director and/or key employee of the organization.
Source: IRS Form 990
Board Meeting Minutes
Documented
Lower effect on score
Charity Navigator looks to confirm on the Form 990 that the organization has this process in place as an accountability and transparency measure.
An official record of the events that take place during a board meeting ensures that a contemporaneous document exists for future reference.
Source: IRS Form 990
Document Retention and Destruction
Listed
Lower effect on score
Charity Navigator looks for the existence of a document retention and destruction policy per the Form 990 as an accountability and transparency measure.
This policy establishes guidelines for the handling, backing up, archiving and destruction of documents. These guidelines foster good record keeping procedures that promote data integrity.
Source: IRS Form 990
Whistleblower Policy
Listed
Lower effect on score
Charity Navigator looks for the existence of a whistleblower policy per the Form 990 as an accountability and transparency measure.
This policy outlines procedures for handling employee complaints, as well as a confidential way for employees to report financial or other types of mismanagement.
Source: IRS Form 990
Additional Information
Unscored
This beta feature is currently viewable only on desktop or tablet screens. Check back later for updates.
Total Revenue and Expenses
This chart displays the trend of revenue and expenses over the past several years for this organization, as reported on their IRS Form 990.
Salary of Key Persons
Presented here are up to five of this organization's highest compensated employees. This compensation data includes salary, cash bonuses, and expense accounts and is displayed exactly how it is reported to the IRS. The amounts do not include nontaxable benefits, deferred compensation, or other amounts not reported on Form W-2. In some cases, these amounts may include compensation from related organizations. Read the IRS policies for compensation reporting
SHELBI WATERS, PRESIDENT
$0
NATASSIA CHERNE, VICE PRESIDENT
$0
BECKY BERTSCH, SECRETARY
$0
KELLY MATALKA, MEMBER AT LARGE
$0
KELSEY MAHONE, PAST PRESIDENT
$0
Source: IRS Form 990 (page 7), filing year 2019
Business Master File Data
Below are some key data points from the Exempt Organization IRS Business Master File (BMF) for this organization. Learn more about the BMF on the IRS website
Activities:
YMCA, YWCA, YMCA, etc. (BMF activity code: 324)
Foundation Status:
Organization which receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or the general public 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) (BMF foundation code: 15)
Affiliation:
Independent - the organization is an independent organization or an independent auxiliary (i.e., not affiliated with a National, Regional, or Geographic grouping of organizations). (BMF affiliation code: 3)
Data Sources: IRS Forms 990
The Form 990 is a document that nonprofit organizations file with the IRS annually. We leverage finance and accountability data from it to form Encompass ratings. Click here to view this organization's Forms 990 on the IRS website (if any are available).
Pandemic Response
Due to the unprecedented nature of the pandemic, we give charities such as this one the opportunity to share the story of COVID's impact on them. Charities may submit their own pandemic responses through their nonprofit portal.
Project BEE reported being impacted by COVID-19 in the following ways:
Program Delivery
Fundraising Capacity
Revenue
Staffing
Administrative Capacity
Grants Received
How COVID-19 impacted the organization's operations financially:
We saw an increase in need for service in 2020 (and 2021). Other agencies were also impacted, or even had stricter requirements for assistance, so we were slammed.
How COVID-19 impacted the organization's delivery of programs:
We had to switch to hotel vouchers, vs. our tiny shelter with one small communal bathroom. This added expense, but kept folks safe.
How this organization adapted to changing conditions caused by COVID-19:
We adapted by switching to tele case management.
Innovations the organization intends to continue permanently after the pandemic:
Housing First model care.
Impact & Results
This score estimates the actual impact a nonprofit has on the lives of those it serves, and determines whether it is making good use of donor resources to achieve that impact.
Impact & Results Score
100
out of 100
Project BEE is highly cost-effective, earning a passing score.
Impact
$40 provides a night of shelter to a person experiencing homelessness.
Do you work at Project BEE? Join the waitlist for an updated Impact & Results score.
Impact & Results Report
100
of 100 points
This beta feature is currently viewable only on desktop or tablet screens. Check back later for updates.
Rated Program
Program
Emergency Shelter
Activities
The nonprofit provides people experiencing homelessness with a temporary place to stay.
Program Type
Emergency Shelter
Beneficiaries Served
People experiencing homelessness
Program Geography
Ward County, ND
Time Period of Data
1/1/19 to 12/12/19
Outcomes and Cost
Outcomes: Changes in the lives of those served by a nonprofit. They can be caused by the nonprofit.
Costs: The money spent by a nonprofit and its partners and beneficiaries.
Impact: Outcome caused by a nonprofit relative to its cost.
Cost-effectiveness: A judgment as to whether the cost was a good use of resources to cause the outcome.
Outcome Metric
A night of shelter for a person experiencing homelessness
Outcome Data Source
Ratings are based on data the nonprofit itself collects on its work. We use the most recent year with sufficient data. Typically, this data allows us to calculate direct changes in participants' lives, such as increased income.
Outcome data collected during the program. The nonprofit submitted data on nights of shelter provided.
Method for Attributing Outcomes
We don't know if the observed changes were caused by the nonprofit's program or something else happening at the same time (e.g., a participant got a raise). To determine causation, we take the outcomes we observe and subtract an estimate of the outcomes that would have happened even without the program (i.e., counterfactual outcomes).
We assume that the provision of shelter by one nonprofit does not diminish the provision of shelter by any other (neighboring) nonprofit. We also assume there is, in general, no slack capacity in the homeless shelter system. In the absence of a given shelter, beneficiaries would not be able to stay at another shelter because other shelters are assumed to have no beds to spare. We therefore set the counterfactual to zero.
Cost Data Source
After estimating the program's outcomes, we need to determine how much it cost to achieve those outcomes. All monetary costs are counted, whether they are borne by a nonprofit service deliverer or by the nonprofit’s public and private partners.
Program cost data reported by the nonprofit. Partner and beneficiary costs reported by the nonprofit or estimated by Charity Navigator.
Cost Calculation
$136,372 program costs + $0 partner costs + $0 beneficiary costs = $136,372 total costs
Impact and Determination
We calculate impact, defined as the change in outcomes attributable to a program divided by the cost to achieve those outcomes.
Impact Calculation
$136,372 total costs / 3,403 nights of shelter provided = roughly $40 provides a night of shelter to a person experiencing homelessness.
Benchmark for Rating
Impact & Results scores of emergency shelters are based on the cost of providing a night of shelter relative to the Fair Market Rent in that county. Programs receive an Impact & Results score of 100 if they are less than 200% the Fair Market Rent and a score of 75 if they are less than 400%. If a nonprofit reports impact but doesn't meet the benchmark for cost-effectiveness, it earns a score of 50.
Determination
Highly cost-effective
Analysis Details
Analysis conducted in 2021 by Charity Navigator using data submitted by the nonprofit, theory and evidence from scientific research studies, and public datasets.
Additional Information
Unscored
This beta feature is currently viewable only on desktop or tablet screens. Check back later for updates.
Largest Programs
Project BEE reported its two largest programs on its FY 2019 Form 990 as:
$125,714
Spent in most recent FY
48%
Percent of program expenses
PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING - SEVEN (7) ONE BEDROOM APARTMENTS ARE AVAILABLE FOR RENT FOR WOMEN THAT ARE HOMELESS OR ARE DIAGNOSED WITH A DISABILITY. SEVEN INDIVIDUALS RECEIVED SERVICES IN 2019.
$134,686
Spent in most recent FY
51%
Percent of program expenses
EMERGENCY HOMELESS SHELTER FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN - THE EMERGENCY SHELTER HAS A 12-18 BED CAPACITY WITH LAUNDRY, SHOWER AND COOKING FACILITIES. RESIDENTS ARE ALLOWED TO STAY FOR A MAXIMUM OF 60 DAYS. DU ... (More)
Leadership & Adaptability
This score provides an assessment of the organization's leadership capacity, strategic thinking and planning, and ability to innovate or respond to changes in constituent demand/need or other relevant social and economic conditions to achieve the organization's mission.
Leadership & Adaptability Score
100
out of 100
The score earned by Project BEE is a passing score.
Encompass Rating V4 provides an evaluation of the organization's Leadership & Adaptability through the nonprofit organization submitting a survey response directly to Charity Navigator.
Leadership & Adaptability Report
100
of 100 points
Mission
The nonprofit organization presents evidence of strategic thinking through articulating the organization’s mission
Providing equity and anti-poverty services to rural communities in North Dakota.
Source: Nonprofit submitted responses
Vision
The nonprofit organization presents evidence of strategic thinking through articulating the organization’s vision.
We envision a North Dakota that advocates for dignity and respect through client-centered programs and services.
Source: Nonprofit submitted responses
Strategic Goals
The nonprofit organization presents evidence of strategic thinking and goal setting through sharing their most important strategic goals.
Goal One: Reestablish our permanent supportive housing in Minot.
Goal Type: New program(s) based on observed changes in needs among our constituencies/communities served.
Goal Two: Expand homeless prevention work to ensure that our shelters are not overwhelmed, at capacity, and experiencing waitlists regularly.
Goal Type: Grow, expand, scale or increase access to the existing programs and services.
Goal Three: Grow program staff so that there is 24/7 staffing for safety, and enough case management and specialty staff to meet all needs of clients in all programs.
Goal Type: Grow, expand, scale or increase access to the existing programs and services.
Source: Nonprofit submitted responses
Leadership Development
The nonprofit provides evidence of investment in leadership development
Describe an investment in leadership
Liz has been taking courses through fundraising professionals, investing time in collaborative local efforts focusing on anti-poverty programming, and has also taken leadership courses remotely.
Source: Nonprofit submitted responses
Mobilizing for Mission
The nonprofit provides evidence of leadership through focusing externally and mobilizing resources for the mission.
This organization mobilizes for mission in the following ways:
Strategic Partnerships
Networks of Collective Impact Efforts
Raising Awareness
Policy Advocacy
What are this organization’s external mobilizaton efforts?
We are leading our community's coordinated entry efforts to revolutionize anti-poverty programming in the Souris Valley area.
Source: Nonprofit submitted responses
Story of Adaptability
The nonprofit has an opportunity to tell the story of how the organization adapted to tremendous external changes in the last year.
We unexpectedly lost our director, Meghan, in 2020. Liz Larsen took over and lead the organization through a rebrand, a change in culture, and capacity building. She lead the organization from being one staff member (her) to 8 staff members with dedicated roles and sustainable funding.
Source: Nonprofit submitted responses
Culture & Community
This score provides an assessment of the organization's engagement with the constituents it serves, a practice we term Constituent Feedback. When organizations listen to constituents, they are able to better deliver on programs and meet the needs of stakeholders. A future version of this Beacon will also assess an organization's people operations and its Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) metrics.
Culture & Community Score
100
out of 100
The score earned by Project BEE is a passing score.
Encompass Rating V4 provides an evaluation of an organization's Culture and Community by measuring its Constituent Feedback practices (see report below). Constituent Feedback data provides 100% of the basis for the initial evaluation of the Culture & Community Beacon.
Culture & Community Report
100
of 100 points
This beta feature is currently viewable only on desktop or tablet screens. Check back later for updates.
Constituent Feedback
Full Credit
This organization reported that it is collecting feedback.
Here's how this organization is listening and learning from the people they serve:
How is your organization collecting feedback from the people you serve?
Electronic surveys (by email, tablet, etc.), Case management notes
How is your organization using feedback from the people you serve?
To identify and remedy poor client service experiences, To identify bright spots and enhance positive service experiences, To make fundamental changes to our programs and/or operations, To identify where we are less inclusive or equitable across demographic groups
With whom does your organization share the feedback you got from the people you serve?
Our staff, Our board, Our funders
What challenges does your organization face in collecting feedback from the people you serve?
It is difficult to get the people we serve to respond to requests for feedback, The people we serve tell us they find data collection burdensome, It is difficult to find the ongoing funding to support feedback collection, Staff find it hard to prioritize feedback collection and review due to lack of time
Briefly describe a recent change that your organization made in response to feedback from the people you serve.
Re: the Dakota Diaper Pantry, we discovered that our clients felt that they were not receiving enough of a supply of diapers/wipes for their children. After feedback was analyzed, we concluded that we needed to distribute more. We changed the process.
Methodology
Charity Navigator believes nonprofit organizations that engage in inclusive practices, such as collecting feedback from the people and communities they serve, may be more effective. We've partnered with GuideStar by Candid to survey organizations about their feedback practices. Nonprofit organizations can fill out the How We Listen section of their Candid profile to receive a rating.
Charity Navigator awards full credit for this Beacon to every nonprofit that is eligible for an Encompass Rating that completes the survey, in recognition of their willingness to publicly share this information with the nonprofit and philanthropic communities. This data is not evaluated for quality at this time. Validation will be added in future iterations of this Beacon.
Analysis and Research
Like the overall Encompass Rating System, the Culture & Community Beacon is designed to evolve as metrics are developed and ready for integration. Our partnership with Feedback Labs and Guidestar by Candid, and other partners including Fund for Shared Insight, GlobalGiving, and Keystone Accountability, enables us to launch the first version of this beacon with Constituent Feedback information collected on Candid's site.
Feedback practices have been shown to support better Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion outcomes, an essential area of assessment that we intend to further expand and develop in the future. Feedback Labs has documented several studies which indicate that beyond achieving organizational goals, nonprofits that are attentive and responsive to concerns and ideas raised by beneficiaries establish stronger relationships with the people they serve, promote greater equity, and empower constituents in ways that can help to ensure better long-term outcomes. You can find resources to help nonprofits improve their feedback practices here.
Nonprofit Comment
Before publishing, we ask every nonprofit we can to review our work, offer corrections and provide a comment.
This nonprofit did not provide a comment