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
55
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 45 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 45 Fragile Recovery
2020 37 Fragile Recovery
2019 25 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 25 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2017 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2014 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2012 25 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JENNIFER WOS Board President
ALLISON SWAUGER Board President
JENNIFER MARTINO Treasurer
KELLY HATFIELD Secretary

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JEN WOS Board President
JENN MARTINO Board President
THOMAS MANFREDO Treasurer
KELLY HATFIELD Secretary

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JEN WOS Board President
LISA SAINT CLAIR Board President
THOMAS MANFREDO Treasurer
JENN MARTINO Secretary
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
5 / 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

Compared to 296 other orgs in PA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 27 points below the peer median (5 vs. 32).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 25 → 41 over 5 years (improving by 16 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.