Governance Lag
Governance Lag
Governance Lag Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
Trajectory Thumbprint

Governance Lag

What does this mean?

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

The Path Forward

The Scaffold

Brings immediate structural maturity. It represents the necessity of outside, independent oversight to manage new scale, breaking the echo chamber of a founding 'friends and family' board.

The Scaffold
The Scaffold
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Governance Lag
Overall
62
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
100
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Governance Lag

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2021 62 Stable Stable Watch
2020 40 Fragile Recovery
2019 37 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2018 49 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MELISSA MCCANNA Board President
LEANN ROCK Treasurer
AMY COLDREN Secretary
AMY THOMAS Board President
JENNINGS GLENN Artistic Director

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MELISSA MCCANNA Board President
LEANN ROCK Treasurer
AMY COLDREN Secretary
AMY THOMAS Board President
JENNINGS GLENN Artistic Director
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
100 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
62 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 75 other orgs in MD with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 69 points above the peer median (100 vs. 31).

5-year trend: Governance Lag

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

Overall score has gone from 49 → 62 over 4 years (improving by 13 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. 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.