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
40
Score
Program
45
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 12.6% 45 Fragile Recovery
2023 13.2% 47 Fragile Recovery
2022 11.5% 45 Fragile Recovery
2021 55.1% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2020 18.8% 43 Fragile Recovery
2019 12.6% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 19.7% 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 14.8% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2016 17.1% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 51 Fragile Recovery
2011 47 Financially Distressed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
AMANDA MALONEY Executive Director 10.0% of Rev
CHRISTINA DAVIDSON Executive Director 6.2% of Rev
AMANDA SWENDSEN Board President
ANDREW BRESSTTE Board President
EMILY EARP Treasurer
ALISON KARCH Secretary
AMANDA SWENDSEN Board President
ANDREW BRESSTTE Board President
JESSICA STEWART Treasurer
ALISON KARCH Secretary

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
CHRISTINA DAVIDSON Executive Director 8.3% of Rev
AMANDA SWENDSEN Board President
EMILY EARP Treasurer
ALISON KARCH Secretary
ANDREW BRESSETTE Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
40 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 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 123 other orgs in GA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 15 points above the peer median (45 vs. 30).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 43 → 45 over 5 years (improving by 2 points).

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.