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
46
Score
Governance
45
Score
Financial
60
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
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 24.7% 46 Governance-Stressed Gov Risk
2022 17.4% 46 Fragile Gov Risk
2021 19.3% 46 Fragile Recovery
2020 48 Fragile Recovery
2019 28.1% 35 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2018 23.9% 36 Governance-Stressed Gov Risk
2017 13.2% 49 Fragile Recovery
2016 8.1% 47 Fragile Recovery
2015 14.1% 42 Fragile Recovery
2014 17.5% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 8.8% 39 Fragile Recovery
2012 49 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
NA N/A
WESLEY BROWN Secretary
DANIEL BAKER Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DANIEL BAKER Treasurer 13.5% of Rev
WESLEY BROWN Secretary 10.7% of Rev
JOHN ANDERSEN Board President 1.4% of Rev

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JOHN ANDERSEN Board President
WESLEY BROWN Secretary
DANIEL BAKER Treasurer

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Steve Bestenlehner Board President
JOHN ANDERSEN Secretary
WESLEY BROWN Treasurer
DANIEL BAKER Employee
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
45 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
46 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Fewer than 3 peers found in AZ for this NTEE subcategory; peer comparison would not be statistically meaningful.

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. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).
  2. Reduce top-officer compensation from 24.7% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~5 points.

Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.