Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
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
34
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
5
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

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
2023 — — — 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2022 — — 3.0% 41 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2021 — — 3.8% 38 Financially Distressed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JOHN WELKER Board President 3.7% of Rev
CELESTE PENDAVIS Chairman —
DOUG PISIK Board President —
STACY CRANE Treasurer —
LINDSEY VICTOR Secretary —
JANE BLOUNT Board Member —
LALOHNI CAMPBELL Board Member —
LYNN COCHRAN-SCHRODER Board Member —
AMY NELSON Board Member —
CAROLYN SHAPIRO Board Member —
MELISSA SIEGELMAN Board Member —
CARYL SMITH Board Member —
JAMES WEIS Board Member —
RACHEL VAN BUSKIRK Board Member —
TARA LEE Board Member —
CHRISTIAN CLARK Board Member —
MAYA ROBINSON Board Member —
KAREN REED Board Member —
SIGELE WINBUSH Board Member —
SCOTT MORRIS Board Member —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JOHN WELKER Board President 1.2% of Rev
CELESTE PENDAVIS Chairman —
DOUG PISIK Board President —
STACY CRANE Treasurer —
LINDSEY VICTOR Secretary —
JANE BLOUNT Board Member —
LALOHNI CAMPBELL Board Member —
LYNN COCHRAN-SCHRODER Board Member —
KAREN FLANDERS-REID Board Member —
CAROLYN SHAPIRO Board Member —
MELISSA SIEGELMAN Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
5 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
34 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 209 other orgs in GA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 50 points below the peer median (5 vs. 55).

5-year trend: Steady State

No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.

Overall score has gone from 38 → 34 over 3 years (declining by 4 points).

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. 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.