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
35
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
40
Score
Program
5
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
2023 35 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 90.0% 38 Fragile Gov Risk
2021 41 Financially Distressed Recovery
2020 68.4% 42 Governance-Stressed Recovery
2019 41 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2018 41 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2017 41 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2016 45 Fragile Recovery
2015 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2014 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2013 25 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2012 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2011 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Lalitha Ramamoorthy Board President 205.0% of Rev
Ravi Gopal Treasurer
Sashikiran Narasimhan Board President

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Lalitha Ramamoorthy Board President 372.9% of Rev
Ravi Gopal Treasurer
Sashikiran Narasimhan Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
40 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
35 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 45 other orgs in MI with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 30 points below the peer median (5 vs. 35).

5-year trend: Steady State

No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.

Overall score has gone from 41 → 35 over 5 years (declining by 6 points).

What's driving this score

What would change this score

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

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