House of Mercy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202465585
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Federal Way, WA, United States
Phone
206-651-7840
Rating
55
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Religious Media, Communications
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,334,743
Expenses
$2,978,809
Assets
$1,538,458
Liabilities
$25,205

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Robert Faulk Jr (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Robert Faulk Jr (CEO): $162,002 total reported compensation
  • Michael Lovrick (Program Manager): $105,063 total reported compensation
  • Cristi Faulk (Finance Manager): $92,187 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to empower individuals in recovery and transition by providing comprehensive employment services that build stability, restore dignity, and open doors to lasting careers. Through our employment services initiative Next Step Work Hub, we partner with local employers and provide hands-on support. We create pathways that reduce barriers, strengthen communities, and transform lives. Services Provided i.

What it reported doing in 2025

Faith based clean and sober housing programs for men and women.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 68% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 39% for direct work, 58% for grants, and 3% for member benefits.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 49
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.3%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Limited
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.7%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 89.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 0 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.