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
37
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
40
Score
Program
15
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 37 Fragile Stable Watch
2020 38 Fragile Recovery
2019 23 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 35 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 27 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 23 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2014 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2012 51 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PAT HUGHES Board President
BOBBI JORDAN Secretary
CHARLIE MORGAN Treasurer
MAIA CARTER Board Member
BETTE GRAY Board Member
SHANNON HAUGHLAND Board Member
DEBBY LEVECK Board Member
MELINDA MCADAMS Board Member
TONYA PULETAU-LANG Board Member
HANNAH PORTELLO-SWAGEL Board Member
JOHN STEIN Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PAT HUGHES Board President
BOBBI JORDAN VICE-PRESIDE
CHARLIE MORGAN Treasurer
RAIN VAN DEN BERG Secretary
MELINDA MCADAMS Board Member
JOHN STEIN Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
40 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
37 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 30 other orgs in AK with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 21 points below the peer median (15 vs. 36).

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

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

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