Epaz
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 860562710
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2016–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Chandler, AZ, USA
- Phone
- 6025135816
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $95,022
- Expenses
- $75,888
- Assets
- $103,393
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SOWJANYA CHINTALAPATI (President)
- DAVID GILES (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- SOWJANYA CHINTALAPATI (President)
- FABRIZIO MASCIONI (Treasurer)
- DAVID GILES (Vice President)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide information & education regarding the environmental industry & pollution prevention
What it reported doing in 2025
We focus on 3 main programs to support ehs & sustainability areas: annual technical conference to roughly 250-500 professionals, monthly educational seminars for members covering regulatory updates, and scholarship program awards annually to students. These initiatives provide networking, continuing education, and industry support for environmental professionals in the state.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 50
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 57
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 46.4%; rating input score 46
- Program expense ratio: 58.2%; rating input score 58
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 20.1%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.36; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 66.7% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 46.4% of revenue deployed · 58.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $44K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 58/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.