Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Steady State

What does this mean?

No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.

The Path Forward

The Stewardship

Focuses on long-term sustainability and gentle cultivation of existing resources rather than forced expansion. It honors the organization's established role as a reliable anchor.

The Stewardship
The Stewardship
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Steady State
Overall
45
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
65
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2023 45 Fragile Recovery
2022 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2021 49 Fragile Recovery
2020 35 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2019 35 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2017 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2016 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2015 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2014 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2012 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2011 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2010 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2009 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Teodoro Ramos Treasurer Hidden
Lamar Lockett Board President Hidden
Malgorzata Rejnowska Secretary Hidden

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Lamar Lockett Board President Hidden
Malgorzata Rejnowska Secretary Hidden
Teodoro Ramos Treasurer Hidden
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
65 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
45 / 100
Priority Review

The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →

Peer comparison

Compared to 195 other orgs in IL with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 30 points above the peer median (65 vs. 35).

5-year trend: Steady State

No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.

Overall score has gone from 35 → 45 over 5 years (improving by 10 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.