Mission Drift
What does this mean?
Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.
The Path Forward
The Lodestar
A radical recommitment to the core mission. It requires the organization to gain the strength to say 'no' to restricted funding that pulls them away from their true purpose.
Title
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | — | — | 56.4% | 30 | Critical Intervention Needed | Gov Risk | |
| 2019 | — | — | — | 51 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2018 | — | — | — | 41 | Fragile | Decline Risk | |
| 2017 | — | — | — | 47 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2016 | — | — | — | 37 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2015 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2014 | — | — | — | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2013 | — | — | — | 27 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2012 | — | — | — | 21 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2011 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2021
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LISA CLATER | Executive Dir. | 35.1% of Rev | ||
| ROBERT CLATER | Board Member | 21.4% of Rev | ||
| MAGGIE TREMOLS | Board President | — | ||
| LAURA LEVINSON | Board President | — | ||
| DR STEPHEN FARRIS | Secretary | — | ||
| BRENDA BUSH | Board Member | — | ||
| CANDACE PAYNE | Board Member | — | ||
| MICHAEL BARNETT | Board Member | — |
Score breakdown
The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →
Peer comparison
Compared to 146 other orgs in NC with NTEE prefix A6.
Most-divergent component: program score sits 26 points below the peer median (5 vs. 31).
5-year trend: Mission Drift
Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.
Overall score has gone from 37 → 30 over 5 years (declining by 7 points).
What's driving this score
- Comp-to-revenue ratio of 56.4% is well above the sector's 90th percentile (healthy band: 18–22%).
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- Reduce top-officer compensation from 56.4% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~40 points.
- Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).
Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.