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
40
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
30
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 40 Fragile Recovery
2023 39 Fragile Decline Risk
2021 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2020 58 Fragile Recovery
2019 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 51 Fragile Recovery
2017 47 Fragile Recovery
2016 43 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2013 49 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
KEITH BRITTIN Board President
KAY MUNOZ Secretary
JAMES WHALEN Treasurer
JONATHAN DONOVAN-LIETZ Board Member
ROBIN MCHAELEN Board Member
PATRICK MCGRADY Board Member
DAVID DEVOST Board Member
TRAVIS DUFFY Board Member
MATTHEW WALLACE Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JACOB LAMOUREUX Board President
ANTHONY DELIZIA Secretary
W SCOTT MCEVER Treasurer

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DAVID GRANT Board President
W SCOTT MCEVER Secretary
ARTHUR MASI Treasurer
NORMAN LEBRON Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

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

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 131 other orgs in CT with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 8 points below the peer median (30 vs. 38).

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.