Mission Drift
Mission Drift
Mission Drift Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Mission Drift

What does this mean?

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

The Path Forward

The Lodestar

A radical recommitment to the core mission. It requires the organization to gain the strength to say 'no' to restricted funding that pulls them away from their true purpose.

The Lodestar
The Lodestar
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Mission Drift
Overall
28
Score
Governance
45
Score
Financial
15
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Mission Drift

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2023 22.7% 28 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2022 46 Financially Distressed Recovery
2021 45 Fragile Recovery
2020 26 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2019 38 Financially Distressed Recovery
2018 55 Fragile Recovery
2017 45 Fragile Recovery
2016 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2015 33 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 37 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2013 37 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2012 37 Financially Distressed Recovery
2011 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
BLAIR WILEY Board President
MARK A WILSON Board President
TERRILEE WILSON Secretary
MARK A WILSON Treasurer

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
BLAIR WILEY Board President
JUDY OSPITAL Secretary
JOE DINNOCENZO Treasurer
EMILY GRAHAM BOX OFFICE MGR.
BLAIR WILEY Board President
JUDY OSPITAL Secretary
JOE DINNOCENZO Treasurer
EMILY GRAHAM BOX OFFICE MGR.
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
15 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
45 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
28 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 829 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 18 points below the peer median (15 vs. 33).

5-year trend: Mission Drift

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

Overall score has gone from 38 → 28 over 5 years (declining by 10 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

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. 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.