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
35
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
15
Score
Program
45
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
2023 35 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2022 0.2% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 0.5% 48 Fragile Recovery
2020 38 Fragile Recovery
2019 35 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2016 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 51 Fragile Recovery
2014 47 Fragile Recovery
2013 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2012 47 Fragile Recovery
2011 43 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JACKIE FAST Board President 0.1% of Rev
CHRISTINE MEYER Secretary
TODD STEINBERG Board President
MARLAINE BRUNNER Treasurer
HEATHER SISLER Board President
KIMBERLEY SHAY Secretary
JOHN NACION FINANCIAL COORDINATOR

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
CHRISTINE MEYER Secretary
TODD STEINBERG Board President
ALLISON LEGATES Treasurer
HEATHER SISLER Board President
KIM SHAY Secretary
JACKELINE FAST Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
15 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
35 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 176 other orgs in NJ with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 19 points below the peer median (15 vs. 34).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 35 → 35 over 5 years (stable by 0 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.