Mercy Corps
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 911148123
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Boone, IA, US
- Phone
- (888) 842-0842
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- International Relief
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $376,251,780
- Expenses
- $387,107,008
- Assets
- $383,273,167
- Liabilities
- $291,149,251
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
34 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Tjada D'Oyen McKenna (Chief Executive Officer)
- Jeremy Snyder (Vice President, High Impact Philanthropy)
- Joshua Taylor Dewald (Vice President - Evidence and Learning)
- Katherine Phillips-Barrasso (Vice President - Policy and Advocacy)
- Sanjay Gurung (Vice President -Technical Resources & Quality)
- Shannon Marie Alexander Sweet (Vice President - Global Program Support)
Highest reported compensation
- Tjada D'Oyen McKenna (Chief Executive Officer): $601,632 total reported compensation
- Jennifer Sime (Chief Operating Officer): $382,921 total reported compensation
- Chad Snelgar (Chief Financial & Administrative Officer, Corporate Treasurer (from 12/24)): $379,209 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Mercy Corps' mission is to alleviate suffering, poverty and oppression by helping people build secure, productive and just communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
Health - Water and Food Security: In the midst of conflict and climate change, both of which pose significant risks to health, Mercy Corps works to improve health outcomes by ensuring access to safe and nutritious food and clean and safe water. Mercy Corps meets urgent food needs while also building more inclusive and resilient food systems, minimizing the impacts of food crises on households, preventing the destabilization of food systems during conflict and natural disasters, and increasing the resilience of food systems to climate change. This year, Mercy Corps reached nearly 17 million people across over 100 programs working to improve food security in 37 countries. Mercy Corps works to ensure people have equitable and sustained access to clean and safe water as climate change, poor water governance, inadequate water management and inequitable control of resources deepen water insecurity. Whether responding to immediate water and sanitation needs in an emergency by providing access to lifesaving water, sanitation and hygiene services, or overseeing large-scale water infrastructure projects and fostering equitable and inclusive water governance processes, Mercy Corps strengthens the capacity of communities and the water systems they rely on. This year, Mercy Corps reached over 8 million people across 71 programs advancing water security in 29 countries.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 48% for direct work, and 52% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77.7%; rating input score 78
- Program expense ratio: 75.5%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: $19.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Pass
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Pass
- Requires grant agreements: Pass
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -2.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.76; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.7%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 10 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 77.7% of revenue deployed · 75.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $292.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $602K · 34 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.6M reported
- Consistency: 40 of 42 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 11 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 33 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 13 filed related-organization links
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 3 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.