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
19
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 41.2% 19 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 45.0% 17 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 39.3% 22 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2020 35.0% 22 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2019 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MARISA HAMAMOTO Artistic Director 2.8% of Rev
JOEL HERNANDEZ Board Member
JENNA ROSE HUNTER Board Member
LORI SAMUELS Board Member
VANESSA RAMOS Board Member
BRIGETTE VANN Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MARISA HAMAMOTO Artistic Director 39.3% of Rev
DAVID HALL Board Member
BRIDGETTE VANN Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MARISA HAMAMOTO Artistic Director 44.6% of Rev
DAVID HALL Board Member
BRIDGETTE VANN Board Member
AMY BLACKMAN Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MARISA HAMAMOTO Artistic Director 39.7% of Rev
DAVID HALL Board Member
BRIDGETTE VANN Board Member
AMY BLACKMAN Board Member
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
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
19 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Fewer than 3 peers found in CA for this NTEE subcategory; peer comparison would not be statistically meaningful.

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. Reduce top-officer compensation from 41.2% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~38 points.
  2. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).

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