Mercy Housing

Legal name: Mercy Housing California

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943081666
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3038303300
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$37,570,015
Expenses
$47,420,026
Assets
$271,954,064
Liabilities
$135,704,301

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

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DOUG SHOEMAKER (PRESIDENT)
  • ED HOLDER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RAMIE DARE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LILLIAN LEW-HAILER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ELIZABETH KUWADA (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DOUG SHOEMAKER (PRESIDENT): $317,896 total reported compensation
  • ED HOLDER (VICE PRESIDENT): $310,484 total reported compensation
  • MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT): $308,489 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To create stable, vibrant, and healthy communities by developing, financing, and operating affordable, program-enriched housing for families, seniors, and people with special needs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Resident services and programs are provided free of charge to residents of low-income multi-family rental properties including families, seniors, and people with special needs. The resident services and programs fall into four primary areas - education, community, health and wellness, and economic stability. Resident services and programs are tailored to meet the needs of each low-income housing community, including after-school programs for children, ged and english courses, employment initiatives and homeownership seminars.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 75% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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.
  • 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 76
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.6%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.74; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.8%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 6 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $45.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $318K · 32 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $264K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 526 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.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.