Compensation Escalation Cycle
Compensation Escalation Cycle
Compensation Escalation Cycle Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Compensation Escalation Cycle

What does this mean?

Revenue grows modestly, but top officer compensation grows consistently for 5 years, breaching danger zones. The executive is negotiating aggressive raises against a compliant board.

The Path Forward

The Steward

Re-establishes board supremacy over executive extraction. It freezes compensation and mandates that all future financial rewards be tied strictly to verifiable mission expansion.

The Steward
The Steward
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Compensation Escalation Cycle
Overall
18
Score
Governance
45
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Compensation Escalation

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2015 24.1% 18 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 14.6% 24 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 16.7% 20 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 15.1% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2011 13.4% 35 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

No IRS 990 Part VII compensation data available for this organization.

Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
0 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
45 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
18 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 176 other orgs in NJ with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 34 points below the peer median (0 vs. 34).

5-year trend: Compensation Escalation Cycle

Revenue grows modestly, but top officer compensation grows consistently for 5 years, breaching danger zones. The executive is negotiating aggressive raises against a compliant board.

Overall score has gone from 35 → 18 over 5 years (declining by 17 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).
  2. Build cash reserves to at least 3 months of operating expenses — moves financial resilience score meaningfully (~10 points).

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