Insufficient Data
What does this mean?
Not enough historical data to determine a longitudinal pattern.
Title
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | — | — | — | 26 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2022 | — | — | — | 52 | Fragile | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2023
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Richard Taylor | Board President | — | ||
| Louise Johnson | Secretary | — | ||
| Kaidi Grant | Board Member | — | ||
| Christopher Grant | Board Member | — |
Score breakdown
The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →
Peer comparison
Compared to 246 other orgs in MA with NTEE prefix A6.
Most-divergent component: program score sits 29 points below the peer median (0 vs. 29).
5-year trend: Insufficient Data
Not enough historical data to determine a longitudinal pattern.
Overall score has gone from 52 → 26 over 2 years (declining by 26 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.
What's driving this score
- All-volunteer org with no paid officers — governance signal is neutral (default 50), not absent.
- Financial resilience score in the bottom quartile — reserves and liabilities ratios warrant review.
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- Build cash reserves to at least 3 months of operating expenses — moves financial resilience score meaningfully (~10 points).
Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.