Insufficient Data
At least 3 years of filing history are required to project a trajectory.
Insufficient Data
Market
Archetype
Mechanical
Natural
Tier
Stable
Trajectory Thumbprint
Insufficient Data
What does this mean?
Not enough historical data to determine a longitudinal pattern.
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Insufficient Data ↓
Overall
49
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
60
Score
Program
30
Score
Title
-
Institutions
-
Avg Revenue
-
Risk Profile
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Insufficient Data
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Hidden | Hidden | — | — | Unknown | — | |
| 2023 | — | — | — | 49 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2022 | — | — | — | 55 | Fragile | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2025
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JAMES BAKER | Board President | — | ||
| SHEA ZUKOWSKI | Board President | — | ||
| AUDREY RACINES | Board Member | — | ||
| GARY GUTHRIE | Treasurer | — | ||
| JOHN OETTING | Secretary | — | ||
| MICHAEL BAKER | Board Member | — | ||
| MITCHELL LOPEZ | Board Member | — | ||
| QAZA NAZEER | Board Member | — | ||
| LINDSEY KLEINBERG | Board President | — | ||
| ERIN MCDERMOTT | Board Member | — | ||
| KATE HUGHES | Board Member | — | ||
| TYRONE WEBB | Board Member | — |
Tax year 2023
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JIM BAKER | Board President | — | ||
| AUDREY RACINES | Board President | — | ||
| JOHN OETTING | Secretary | — | ||
| GARY GUTHRIE | Treasurer | — | ||
| MICHAEL BAKER | Board Member | — | ||
| SHEA ZUKOWSKI | Board Member | — | ||
| ANNE ALEXANDER | Board Member | — | ||
| JESSICA MAURO | Board Member | — | ||
| JO ANN PENDLETON | Board Member | — | ||
| CHRIS BASILE | Treasurer | — | ||
| JULIE THOMASES | Board Member | — | ||
| GREG PAUL | Board Member | — |
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown
Score breakdown
Financial resilience
60 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
49 / 100
Stable
The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →
Peer comparison
Compared to 221 other orgs in PA with NTEE prefix A2.
Most-divergent component: governance score sits 28 points below the peer median (50 vs. 78).
5-year trend: Insufficient Data
Not enough historical data to determine a longitudinal pattern.
What's driving this score
- All-volunteer org with no paid officers — governance signal is neutral (default 50), not absent.
What would change this score
No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.
Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.