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
42
Score
Financial
60
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
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 39.6% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2022 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 40 Fragile Recovery
2020 36 Fragile Recovery
2019 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2017 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2016 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2015 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 43 Fragile Recovery
2013 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MARNIE WERNER EXECUTIVE DI 39.7% of Rev
SCOTT BETTS Board President
JILL DELAVAN Secretary
MARNIE BENSON Board Member
MEGAN LEVINE TREASURUER

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MARNIE WERNER EXECUTIVE DI
SCOTT BETTS Board President
JILL DELAVAN Secretary
MARNIE BENSON Board Member
MEGAN LEVINE TREASURUER

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MARNIE WENER EXECUTIVE DI
SCOTT BETTS Board President
JILL DELAVAN Secretary
MARNIE BENSON Board Member
MEGAN LEVINE TREASURUER
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
60 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 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 183 other orgs in CO 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.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Reduce top-officer compensation from 39.6% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~35 points.
  2. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).

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