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
30
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
5
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
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 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2023 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2022 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 35 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2020 34 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2019 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2017 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 35 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 35 Financially Distressed Recovery
2013 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 51 Fragile Recovery
2011 41 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JODY BURCH PUBLICITY CH
RACHEL MILLER Secretary
SUZANNE ORTIZ Treasurer
CHELSEA PENDERGRAFT Board President
SUZANNE PREVOST VICE-PRESIDE

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
VICKI CABLER VICE-PRESIDE
MINDY FREEMAN Board President
KORI LEEPER Treasurer
CHELSEA PENDERGRAFT Secretary
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
5 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
30 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 67 other orgs in OK with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 31 points below the peer median (5 vs. 36).

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. 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.