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
55
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
75
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
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 12.8% 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2023 — — — 55 Fragile Recovery
2022 — — — 54 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
GARRETT TORBERT Executive Director 12.8% of Rev
THOMAS J BUCKLEY Treasurer —
LINDSAY CLEMONS Board Member —
JESSE WADE Board President —
BECKY SCOTT Board President —
JUSTIN KLIEBER Secretary —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
GARRETT TORBERT Executive Director 2.5% of Rev
PHILLP STOCKTON Board Member 0.5% of Rev
THOMAS J BUCKLEY Treasurer —
LINDSAY CLEMONS Board President —
BRANDY WILLIAMS Board President —
SHANNA CLINE Secretary —
KAREN OVERSTREET Board Member —
MIRIAM BALZLI Board Member —
RACHEL WOOD Board Member —
SARA HORAN Board Member —
MIRIAM BALZLI Board Member —
ANGI BOURGEOIS Board Member —
PHILLP STOCKTON Board Member —
COURTNEY TOLLESON Board Member —
GARRETT TORBERT Executive Director —
THOMAS J BUCKLEY Treasurer —
LINDSAY CLEMONS Board President —
BRANDY WILLIAMS Board President —
SHANNA CLINE Secretary —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
75 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
55 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 41 other orgs in MS with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 27 points above the peer median (75 vs. 48).

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

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

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