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
43
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
55
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
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 43 Fragile Recovery
2022 37 Financially Distressed Recovery
2021 74.5% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2020 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2019 55 Fragile Recovery
2018 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 51 Fragile Recovery
2015 47 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2014 47 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2013 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 47 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Robert Blais Artistic Director 46.5% of Rev
Erin Eberhardt Executive Director 10.1% of Rev
Sarah Richardson Board President
Linnea Wilhjelm Secretary
Christopher Richardson Treasurer
Leah-Marie Gagnon Board Member
Royce Meyer Board Member
Chauntelle Eckhaus Board Member
Emily Shea Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Robert Blais Artistic Director 36.9% of Rev
Sean Brekke Executive Director 21.6% of Rev
Leah Wilhjelm Executive Director 10.8% of Rev
Judith Ehrlich Board President
Julie Griffin Board President
Leah Marie-Gagnon Treasurer
Jessa Loranger Secretary
Royce Meyer Board Member
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
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
43 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 36 other orgs in VT with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 16 points below the peer median (15 vs. 31).

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.