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
41
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 14.6% 41 Fragile Recovery
2023 37 Fragile Recovery
2022 10.2% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2020 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2019 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 47 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Peter Hardy Artistic Director 7.3% of Rev
Jennifer Kimball Board Member 7.3% of Rev
C E Patten II Board Member
Audrey Galex Board President
Jane Zoellick Board President
Cynthia Webb Secretary
Kelli Spencer Board Member
Ryan Daniels Treasurer
Oliver tum Suden Secretary
Jeanine Botwe-Brown Board Member
Marcie Dickson Board Member
Vanessa Mazabane Board Member
Micheal Stoots Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Jennifer Kimball Board Member 3.2% of Rev
Peter Hardy Artistic Director 3.0% of Rev
Alissa Scherb Treasurer
Edward Henderson II Board Member
C E Patten II Board President
Audrey Galex Board President
Jane Zoellick Secretary
Cynthia Webb Secretary
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
50 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
41 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 123 other orgs in GA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 15 points below the peer median (15 vs. 30).

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. 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.