Mission Drift
Mission Drift
Mission Drift Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
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
39
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Mission Drift

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2022 39 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 39 Fragile Decline Risk
2020 46 Fragile Recovery
2019 19 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 45 Fragile Recovery
2017 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2014 51 Fragile Recovery
2013 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2012 55 Fragile Recovery
2011 51 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Karen Hope Board President
Robert Gaylord Board President
Cheryl Pagano Board President
Jennifer Blazewick Secretary
Kim Green Treasurer
Heather Hall Board President
Lane Thurgood Board President
Kathy Dutke Volunteer Coordinator
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
50 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
39 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 147 other orgs in VA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 24 points below the peer median (5 vs. 29).

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.

Overall score has gone from 45 → 39 over 5 years (declining by 6 points).

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.