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
41
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
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Compensation Escalation

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 12.9% 41 Fragile Recovery
2022 46 Fragile Recovery
2021 22.1% 40 Governance-Stressed Recovery
2020 5.3% 36 Financially Distressed Recovery
2019 1.9% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 4.8% 42 Fragile Recovery
2017 51 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 55 Fragile Recovery
2015 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 47 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 51 Fragile Recovery
2012 45 Financially Distressed Recovery
2011 37 Financially Distressed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PAMELA MARTIN Executive Director 13.5% of Rev
ADINA WELCH Board President
JIM MARTIN Treasurer
LLOYD MCCKRACKEN Board President

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PAMELA MARTIN Executive Dir. 12.9% of Rev
PAM MARTIN Executive Dir. 7.4% of Rev
MAIRI BROOKS Board Member
ADINA WELCH Board President
LLOYD MCCRACKEN Secretary
ADINA WELCH Board Member
MAIRI BROOKS Board President
JIM MARTIN Treasurer
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
41 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 25 other orgs in WA with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 19 points above the peer median (45 vs. 26).

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.

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.