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
24
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
20
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
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2022 63.2% 24 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2020 47 Fragile Recovery
2019 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2017 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 47 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 47 Fragile Recovery
2013 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2012 45 Fragile Recovery
2011 35 Financially Distressed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Paul Hodgson Artistic Director
Jennifer Hodgson Board Member
Scott Smith Media Manager
Andrea Itkin Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Paul Hodgson Artistic Director 37.6% of Rev
Jennifer Hodgson Board Member 25.7% of Rev
Andrea Itkin Board Member
Scott Anthony Smith Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
20 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
24 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 29 other orgs in ME with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 31 points below the peer median (5 vs. 36).

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

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Reduce top-officer compensation from 63.2% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~40 points.
  2. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).

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