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
44
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
55
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

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

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2021 44 Fragile Decline Risk
2020 58 Fragile Decline Risk
2019 62 Stable Stable Watch
2018 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 57 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 61 Stable Stable Watch
2015 57 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 57 Fragile Decline Risk
2013 61 Stable Stable Watch
2012 57 Fragile Decline Risk
2011 61 Stable Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ADAM SHER Board President
LUKE MILLER VICE PRESIDE
JAIME SADEH Secretary
DEVIN BOYDEN Treasurer

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Laurie Wadsworth Board President
Devin Boyden Treasurer
Board President
Jaime Fadeh Secretary

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Laurie Wadsworth Board President
Devin Boyden Board President
Michelle Hansen Treasurer
Laurie Wadsworth Board President
Devin Boyden Board President
Michelle Hansen Treasurer
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
55 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
44 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 130 other orgs in CT with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 23 points below the peer median (5 vs. 28).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

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.