Mercy Foundation North

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943136799
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Redding, CA, USA
Phone
5302473424
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,531,111
Expenses
$5,225,349
Assets
$18,868,463
Liabilities
$12,593

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAKE MANGAS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAKE MANGAS (PRESIDENT): $291,710 total reported compensation
  • ALISA JOHNSON (DIR. OF PHIL): $159,629 total reported compensation
  • MICHELLE MARTIN STREEBY (DIR. OF PHIL): $147,271 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 foundation north raises, manages and distributes philanthropic support to benefit the sponsored and supported works of the sisters of mercy of the americas in the counties of shasta, tehama and siskiyou, in northern California. This philanthropic support primarily benefits programs and services of the following hospitals/organizations of dignity health, a California public benefit corporation: mercy medical center redding, st. Elizabeth community hospital, mercy medical center mt. Shasta, and dignity health connected living. Supported programs benefit the poor, sick, uneducated, elderly and/or distressed, including healthcare, education, social services, elderly and/or assistance to the disadvantaged and or/distressed. The foundation manages a fund development program that is multifaceted. The main office is located in redding, ca. Outlying offices are located in red bluff, ca and mt. Shasta, ca. The foundation implements annual giving, major giving and planned giving activities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Connected living - assist seniors and disabled individuals to independence by providing meals, transportation, and recreational activities to enhance their dignity and encourage continued involvement in the community, provide services that promote independent living to seniors and disabled adults.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 62% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.1%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 90.6%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: $76.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.5%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.61; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.1% of revenue deployed · 90.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 28 of 28 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $292K · 30 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 6 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.