Governance Lag
Governance Lag
Governance Lag Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
Trajectory Thumbprint

Governance Lag

What does this mean?

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

The Path Forward

The Scaffold

Brings immediate structural maturity. It represents the necessity of outside, independent oversight to manage new scale, breaking the echo chamber of a founding 'friends and family' board.

The Scaffold
The Scaffold
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Governance Lag
Overall
64
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
100
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

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

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 64 Stable Stable Watch
2022 61 Stable Stable Watch
2021 48 Fragile Recovery
2020 46 Fragile Recovery
2019 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 41 Fragile Recovery
2015 35 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 57 Fragile Decline Risk
2011 61 Stable Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Board President
Board President
Treasurer
Secretary
Board President
Board President
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Board President
Board President
Treasurer
Secretary
Board President
Board President
Board Member
Board Member
Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
James Posey Board President
Sarah Stamm Board President
Mary Jo Foos Treasurer
Lynne Wagner Secretary
Daleen Askins Board President
Randy Brown Board President
Cyrus Foos Board Member
Floyd Collins Board Member
Ashly Collins Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
100 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
64 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 213 other orgs in OH with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 59 points above the peer median (100 vs. 41).

5-year trend: Governance Lag

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Stabilize program expenses or grow earned-income revenue to break the consecutive-deficit pattern (~8 points to financial score).

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