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
53
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
65
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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
2025 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2024 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2023 — — 9.8% 53 Fragile Recovery
2022 — — 24.9% 46 Fragile Recovery
2021 — — — 41 Fragile Recovery
2020 — — 25.6% 42 Fragile Gov Risk

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Leslie Putnam Executive Director —
Sonja Putnam Treasurer —
Bethany Rowe Board President —
Amy Carlson Secretary —

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Leslie Putnam Executive Director 9.8% of Rev
Sonja Putnam Treasurer —
Bethany Rowe Board President —
Amy Carlson Secretary —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Leslie Putnam Teaching Artist 12.2% of Rev
Bethany Rowe Board President —
Amy Carlson Secretary —
Sonja Putnam Treasurer —
Leslie Putnam Executive Director —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Leslie Putnam Teaching Artist 10.7% of Rev
Emily McCurry Board President —
Amanda Farooqi Secretary —
Travis Lane Treasurer —
Leslie Putnam Executive Director —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
65 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
53 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 222 other orgs in NC with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 13 points above the peer median (65 vs. 52).

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. 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.