Applied Epi Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 872222471
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2021
- Location
- Severn, MD, USA
- Phone
- 6676573374
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Management & Technical Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,043,994
- Expenses
- $1,020,280
- Assets
- $1,050,866
- Liabilities
- $343,355
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ALEXANDER SPINA (PRESIDENT)
- ELBURG VAN BOETZELAER (VICE PRESIDENT)
- NEALE BATRA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- NEALE BATRA (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $86,800 total reported compensation
- ALEXANDER SPINA (PRESIDENT): $6,723 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Applied epi strives to improve applied epidemiology worldwide by expanding access to practical and high-quality training, technology, support, and global community, with an emphasis on low-resource settings.
What it reported doing in 2024
In 2024, applied epi provided synchronous training courses in the use of the free and open-source analytical software r to over 980 participants, in french, english, and spanish. Course participants were from 94 countries, with 31% 1in low- or middle-income countries. Applied epi delivered over 800 support desk calls to assist with r installation and code troubleshooting. In 2024, applied epi's free epidemiologist r handbook was viewed 2.6 million times by 253,000 unique users (cumulatively 9 million times by 923,000 unique users since launch in 2021).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 95% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 62
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 84.9%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 80%; rating input score 80; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- 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: 2.3%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.03; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.2%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 65.6% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 39.7% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 55.7% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 83% of revenue deployed · 84.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $866K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $87K · 6 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $101K reported
- Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.