Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
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
59
Score
Governance
45
Score
Financial
90
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
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
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 24.2% 59 Fragile Gov Risk
2022 61 Stable Stable Watch
2020 53 Fragile Recovery
2019 55 Fragile Decline Risk
2018 61 Stable Stable Watch
2017 57 Fragile Recovery
2016 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 51 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Raines Carr Artistic Director 35.0% of Rev
Meganne Johnson Board President
PAM QUINCY Secretary
Destiny Golden Board Member
Isabel Graf Treasurer
Jennifer Rogers Board Member

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
LEE HAMBY Board Member 24.2% of Rev
Meganne Johnson Board President
George Kruer Board President
ALAN GLEIT Treasurer
PAM QUINCY Secretary
Destiny Golden Board Member
Raines Carr Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
LEE HAMBY Artistic Director 21.5% of Rev
BRIAN JOHNSON Board President
JACK BARNARD Board President
ALAN GLEIT Treasurer
GEORGE KRUER Secretary
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
90 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
45 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
59 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 244 other orgs in FL with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 60 points above the peer median (90 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. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).
  2. Reduce top-officer compensation from 24.2% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~5 points.

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