Commercial beekeepers need healthy, productive honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) colonies, even when the landscape lacks adequate pollen forage to sustain the colonies. As a result, many commercial beekeepers spend significant money and labor on the use of pollen substitutes in their colonies. However, there is little consensus in the literature about the benefits and drawbacks of pollen substitute use on honey bee colony health. In order to understand this critically, it is important to know first how honey bees distribute pollen substitute patties throughout their colonies. We traced the fate of three commercially available pollen substitute patties (MegaBee, UltraBee, AP23) dyed with a nontoxic food coloring (Brilliant Blue FCF) and undyed as negative controls, a dyed positive control (fondant), and a dyed consumption control (Crayola Model Magic Clay) in 44 honey bee colonies. Using spectrophotometry and visual inspection, we analyzed adult bee guts, larval guts, bee bread stores and colony debris underneath the hive for presence of the dye. Our data suggest that (1) a proportion of adult bees ingest the patty, (2) adult bees likely do not feed patty directly to larvae, (3) adult bees do not store patty like bee bread, and (4) only a very small proportion of patty is lost as debris. Collectively our data suggest that honey bee colonies use pollen substitute patties. However, patties likely do not replace the function of natural pollen entirely in terms of larval provisioning and long-term storage as bee bread.