Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
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
47
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
55
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
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 47 Fragile Stable Watch
2023 43 Fragile Recovery
2022 33 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 41 Fragile Recovery
2020 39 Fragile Stable Watch
2019 39 Fragile Decline Risk
2018 47 Fragile Recovery
2017 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 47 Fragile Recovery
2015 43 Fragile Recovery
2014 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2013 47 Fragile Recovery
2012 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 41 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DANIELA SIKORA Artistic Director Hidden
DIANE PURVIS Board President
PEG SHEAHAN Board President
GRETCHEN KENNEDY Secretary
LAURIE BRADBURY Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DANIELA SIKORA Artistic Director Hidden
DIANE PURVIS Board President
JENNIFER CHRISTENSEN Board President
AMY HANCOCK Secretary
LAURIE BRADBURY Treasurer

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DANIELA SIKORA Artistic Director Hidden
AMY DAY Board President
JENNIFER CHRISTENSEN Board President
AMY HANCOCK Secretary
LAURIE BRADBURY Treasurer
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
55 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
47 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 131 other orgs in CT with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 17 points above the peer median (55 vs. 38).

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. Stabilize program expenses or grow earned-income revenue to break the consecutive-deficit pattern (~8 points to financial score).

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