Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
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
47
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
65
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 12.2% 47 Fragile Stable Watch
2023 47 Fragile Recovery
2022 46 Fragile Recovery
2021 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2020 43 Fragile Recovery
2019 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 25 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2016 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 37 Financially Distressed Recovery
2013 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 37 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2011 41 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
David Feltner Treasurer 12.2% of Rev
Sharon Lewis Board President
David Root Secretary

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Sharon Lewis Board President
David Feltner Treasurer
David Root Secretary
David Manzi Board Member
Judy Siegel Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
65 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
47 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 245 other orgs in MA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 23 points above the peer median (65 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

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

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