Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
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
57
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
90
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 57 Fragile Decline Risk
2023 Hidden Hidden 65 Stable Stable Watch
2022 43 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 41 Fragile Recovery
2020 37 Fragile Stable Watch
2019 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2018 41 Fragile Recovery
2017 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 41 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Samatha Gould Board President
David Cass Board President
Gregg Savage Treasurer
Dawn Gomez Secretary
Barbara Esterbrook Officer At Large
Amanda Duggan Board Member
Beth Petr Board Member
Brian Casey Board Member
Chris Delise Board Member
Elaina Kourepenos Board Member
Janice Smith Board Member
Jenette Kollmann Board Member
Jill Blumenthal Shaya Board Member
Nancy Depew Board Member
Nancy Duggan Board Member
Stephanie Henry Board Member
Terri Carotenuto Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
90 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
57 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 245 other orgs in MA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 48 points above the peer median (90 vs. 42).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 37 → 57 over 5 years (improving by 20 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.