Institutional Maturation
Institutional Maturation
Institutional Maturation Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
Trajectory Thumbprint

Institutional Maturation

What does this mean?

The gold standard. 10-year slow, steady, concurrent growth across Financial Health, Governance, and Program. Leadership is scaling their oversight and impact in lockstep.

The Path Forward

The Crown

A mandate to lead the sector. It encourages the organization to mentor emerging nonprofits and embark on generational capital projects, leveraging their profound stability.

The Crown
The Crown
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Institutional Maturation
Overall
53
Score
Governance
58
Score
Financial
45
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Institutional Maturation

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden 4.3% 53 Fragile Recovery
2023 6.6% 44 Financially Distressed Recovery
2022 6.6% 38 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2021 8.6% 40 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2020 5.3% 42 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2019 1.2% 51 Fragile Recovery
2018 5.1% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 4.5% 39 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2016 4.5% 39 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2015 4.7% 39 Financially Distressed Recovery
2014 5.3% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 4.9% 45 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ELIZABETH BROWN Executive Director 3.6% of Rev
MARTHA ROCHELLE Board President
GABE BRUEHL Treasurer
JAMES RADER Secretary

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ELIZABETH BROWN Executive Director 2.8% of Rev
MARTHA ROCHELLE Board President
GABE BRUEHL Treasurer
JAMES RADER Secretary

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ELIZABETH BROWN Executive Director 2.6% of Rev
MARTHA ROCHELLE Board President
GABE BRUEHL Treasurer
JAMES RADER Secretary
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
45 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
58 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
53 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 133 other orgs in TX with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 27 points above the peer median (60 vs. 33).

5-year trend: Institutional Maturation

The gold standard. 10-year slow, steady, concurrent growth across Financial Health, Governance, and Program. Leadership is scaling their oversight and impact in lockstep.

Overall score has gone from 42 → 53 over 5 years (improving by 11 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

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.