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
25
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 34 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2020 24 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2019 21 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 21 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 47 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2015 47 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2014 43 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2013 47 Fragile Recovery
2012 43 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2011 47 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Kayleigh Stevens Board Member 10.1% of Rev
Rebekah Agee Board President
Tyler Agee Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Mary L Weimer Board President
Anna Treasurer

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Mary L Weimer Board President
Margaret Mary Layne Treasurer
Loretta Piazkowski Secretary

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Mary L Weimer Board President
Margaret M Layne Treasurer
Loretta Piazkowski Secretary
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
0 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
25 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 12 other orgs in WV with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 51 points below the peer median (0 vs. 51).

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. Build cash reserves to at least 3 months of operating expenses — moves financial resilience score meaningfully (~10 points).

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