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
55
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
90
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
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
2020 55 Fragile Recovery
2019 54 Fragile Recovery
2018 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 51 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 57 Fragile Recovery
2015 51 Fragile Recovery
2014 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2013 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2012 51 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JENNIFER ESTACIO Board President
JESSICA BARRETT Board President
ELIZABETH MACKENZIE Secretary
PATRICIA RICHARD Board Member
RICHARD BEHLMER Treasurer
KAREN SANBORN Board Member
SCOTT ESTACIO Board President
HANNAH MOORE Board Member
DON RICHARD Board Member
LESLIE GAIL Board Member
DAN FERREIRA Board Member
POLLY ZAJAC Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
CHRIS CHAMBERS Board President
JESSICA BARRETT Board Member
ELIZABETH MACKENZIE Board Member
PATRICIA RICHARD Board Member
RICHARD BEHLMER Treasurer
KAREN SANBORN Board Member
PETER TAVILLA Board President
JOHN WALLACE Board Member
DON RICHARD Board Member
ROBERT KATCHER Board Member
JO-ANN WATSON Board Member
PHIL SANBORN Board Member
VICKI BLASER Board Member
CASSANDRA TOMPKINS Secretary
ABIGAIL TAVILLA Board Member
JENNIFER MURPHY 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
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
55 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 246 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.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Stabilize program expenses or grow earned-income revenue to break the consecutive-deficit pattern (~8 points to financial score).

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