Mercy Housing
Legal name: Mercy Southeast Idaho Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 841284293
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2016
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016
- Location
- Denver, CO, USA
- Phone
- 3038303300
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Development, Construction, Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $242,204
- Expenses
- $172,643
- Assets
- $759,540
- Liabilities
- $781,617
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WILLIAM RUMPF (PRESIDENT)
- BRUCE SAAB (VICE PRESIDENT)
- MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- CHRIS BURCKHARDT (Director/Chairman): $318,319 total reported compensation
- MELISSA CLAYTON (VICE PRESIDENT): $225,923 total reported compensation
- WILLIAM RUMPF (PRESIDENT): $219,930 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. 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 who lack the economic resources to access quality, safe housing opportunities.
What it reported doing in 2016
Own and operate a 34-unit apartment project, known as hamilton court, in mountain home, Idaho. The project provides service to low-income families, elderly, handicapped, homeless and disadvantaged persons.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 81
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.3%; rating input score 71
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 16th 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: 28.7%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.4; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.03; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 75.8%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -13.8% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 71.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $173K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $318K · 8 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2016
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Related organizations: 453 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.
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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.