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
33
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
30
Score
Program
15
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
2024 Hidden Hidden 33 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2023 Hidden Hidden 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2021 39 Fragile Recovery
2020 25 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2019 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2017 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2016 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 45 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2013 47 Fragile Recovery
2012 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2011 51 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
RICHARD KOENIG Board President
NORMAN SCHAIN Treasurer
LANA LEVINE Secretary
LINDSEY MONCKTON Board Member
NANCY TREW-SUGDEN Board Member
ANNE CALMELS Board Member
JILL HEIDEL Board Member
PAUL MCILVAINE Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
30 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
33 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 130 other orgs in CT with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 13 points below the peer median (15 vs. 28).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 27 → 33 over 5 years (improving by 6 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.