Mercy Properties I Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 841173689
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Denver, CO, USA
- Phone
- 3038303300
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,351,678
- Expenses
- $1,613,581
- Assets
- $1,801,793
- Liabilities
- $3,087,126
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KASSIDI BOENING (DIRECTOR/VICE PRESIDENT)
- MELISSA CLAYTON (DIRECTOR/VICE PRESIDENT)
- SHELLY MARQUEZ (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)
- ELLEN ABRAMS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- JOANNA CROSBY (VICE PRESIDENT)
- KUHL BROWN (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MELISSA CLAYTON (DIRECTOR/VICE PRESIDENT): $308,489 total reported compensation
- SHELLY MARQUEZ (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT): $284,440 total reported compensation
- JOE ROSENBLUM (SECRETARY): $242,964 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of mercy properties i, inc is to manage or direct entities which are organized for the purpose of creating stable, vibrant and healthy communities by developing, financing and operating affordable, program-enriched housing for families, seniors, and people with special needs who lack the economic resources to access quality, safe housing opportunities.
What it reported doing in 2024
Manage or direct low and moderate income housing projects and supportive services for low-income families, elderly, handicapped homeless, and disadvantaged persons
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 65% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 59
- Accountability: 32
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 99.2%; rating input score 99
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th 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: -19.4%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.71; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.9%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -14.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $308K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 15 of 16 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 501 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.