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
48
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
35
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

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
2024 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2023 Hidden Hidden 7.1% 48 Fragile Recovery
2022 — — — 46 Fragile Decline Risk
2021 — — — 45 Fragile Recovery
2018 — — — 43 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Gib Parthemore Board Member —
Claire Mulhardt Board Member —
Jeff Gelburd Board Member —
Brad Fisher Board Member —
Scott Huber Board Member —
Gennifer Richie Board Member —
Donald Kibler Board Member —
Daniel Burke Board President —
Christine Leukus Preesident —
Frank Kelly Secretary —
David H Stone Treaasurer —

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Donald Kibler Board Member —
Jennifer Zaborney Board Member —
Daniel Burke Baord Memeber —
Gennifer Ritchey Board Member —
Christine Leukus Board President —
Douglas Morrow Board President —
Frank Kelly Secretary —
David Stone Treasurer —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
35 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
48 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 461 other orgs in PA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 28 points above the peer median (60 vs. 32).

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).
  2. 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.