Mission Drift
Mission Drift
Mission Drift Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
Trajectory Thumbprint

Mission Drift

What does this mean?

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

The Path Forward

The Lodestar

A radical recommitment to the core mission. It requires the organization to gain the strength to say 'no' to restricted funding that pulls them away from their true purpose.

The Lodestar
The Lodestar
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Mission Drift
Overall
52
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
75
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
Mission Drift

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 52 Fragile Recovery
2022 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 44 Fragile Decline Risk
2020 62 Stable Stable Watch
2019 41 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2018 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2017 49 Fragile Recovery
2016 45 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2014 49 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 49 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 49 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
LAUREN VON EUW Secretary
STEPHANIE GRIPP Board President
SHARI SENIOR Board President
JOANNE CARIOLA Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
STEPHANIE GRIPP Treasurer
AILEEN RIGNEY Board President
SHARI SENIOR Board President
KIMBERLY MASSARONI Secretary
JENNIFER HUNTER Secretary

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PHYLIS ANDERSON Board President
SHARI SENIOR Board President
STEPHANIE GRIPP Treasurer
JEN HUNTER Secretary
KIMBERLY MASSARONI FINANCIAL SECRE
AILEEN RIGNEY Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
75 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
52 / 100
Stable

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: financial score sits 37 points above the peer median (75 vs. 38).

5-year trend: Mission Drift

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

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.