Mercy, Inc.

Legal name: Mercy Incorporated

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510159341
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Keizer, OR, USA
Phone
+1.844.934.3434
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,192,112
Expenses
$3,218,154
Assets
$761,249
Liabilities
$15,412

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • STEPHEN SMITH (COO): $99,754 total reported compensation
  • TRAVIS HAMILTON (CFO): $20,841 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Mercy exists to help individuals and communities around the world experience lasting transformation from physical and spiritual poverty through practical assistance, development programs, and strategic partnerships.

What it reported doing in 2025

Crisis Relief - Mercy provides financial and material assistance in response to humanitarian crises, including natural disasters and situations of extreme poverty. Support may include food distribution, temporary shelter, medical assistance, and other emergency humanitarian needs. These efforts are carried out in partnership with a trusted local organization to ensure a timely and effective response.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 88% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.6 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.8%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.7%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -6.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 88.8% of revenue deployed · 87.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.