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
39
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
40
Score
Program
15
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
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden 7.3% 39 Fragile Recovery
2023 Hidden Hidden 51 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 57 Fragile Recovery
2021 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2020 51 Fragile Recovery
2019 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2017 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 49 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 51 Fragile Recovery
2013 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2012 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2011 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PATRICIA RUBANO Board Member 7.3% of Rev
LINDA WILLIAMS Board Member
ELVIRA NEAL Board Member
LYNN TURNER Board Member
KATHLEN BOWEN Board Member
ANNA ROCKWELL Board Member
APRIL PEREYRA Board Member
MERCEDES GALLAGER Board Member
BROOKE NATZKE Board Member
SUSAN WEST-KURZ Board President
CATHY O'NEILL Board President
DIANE PIETTE Secretary
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
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
39 / 100
Priority Review

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: program score sits 14 points below the peer median (15 vs. 29).

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

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

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