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
41
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
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
2023 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 53 Fragile Recovery
2021 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2020 49 Fragile Stable Watch
2019 53 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 53 Fragile Recovery
2017 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 49 Fragile Recovery
2015 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2014 45 Fragile Recovery
2013 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2011 45 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DONNA KENDALL EX-OFFICIO MEM.
JOHN FLEMING EX-OFFICIO MEM.
NOEL HAMILTON CHAIRMAN TERM END 7/31/21
JUD CRARY CHAIRMAN
GARY CAPATA VICE CHAIRMAN
KIMBERLY BERNATZ Board Member
SABRA BORDAS Board Member
DOUGLAS SMITH Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
NOEL HAMILTON CHAIRMAN
JUD CRARY VICE CHAIRMAN
KIMBERLY BERNATZ Board Member
GARY CAPATA Board Member
CARL NEUSS Board Member
DONNA KENDALL EX-OFFICIO MEM.

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Douglas Smith Chairman
Noel Hamilton Chairman
Sabra Bordas Board Member
Kimberly Bernatz Ex-Officio Mem.
Carl Neuss Board Member
Donna Kendall Ex-Officio Mem.
Judy Crary Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
50 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
41 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Fewer than 3 peers found in CA 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.

Overall score has gone from 53 → 41 over 5 years (declining by 12 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

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.