Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
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
52
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
75
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
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
2024 25.9% 52 Governance-Stressed Gov Risk
2023 Hidden Hidden 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2022 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 55 Fragile Recovery
2020 31.2% 42 Fragile Gov Risk
2019 55 Fragile Recovery
2018 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 51 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 55 Fragile Recovery
2015 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 51 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
CYNTHIA NEHR Board Member 25.9% of Rev
LAURA RINEER Treasurer
REGINA SUKANICK Secretary
CORRIE STREAM Board President
ANGELA SANDERS Board President
MEGHAN MCLANE Board Member
JULIE DELICH Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
CYNTHIA NEHR Board Member 20.4% of Rev
VICTORIA DORSEY Treasurer
PRISCILLA KAUFHOLD Secretary
TAMMY JACOBS Board President
CORRIE STREAM 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
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
52 / 100
Developing

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: 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. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).
  2. Reduce top-officer compensation from 25.9% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~8 points.

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