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

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
2023 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2021 46 Fragile Recovery
2019 43 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 39 Fragile Recovery
2017 35 Financially Distressed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MANDY BAKER DRAMA VICE P
JONI BARANIAK ASST TREASUR
LISA BRENNEMAN Board President
ELIZABETH COREY Treasurer
TOM FEDESCO CONCESSION S
DEBBIE FERRIS Board President
CAROL FREDERICK Secretary
KELLY HARTMAN Board President
NICHOLE KEAGY Board President
BERNIE PAVLOCK CONCESSION S
CONNIE POPE Board President
MICHAEL POPE AT-LARGE MEM
PAUL QUEVY AT-LARGE MEM
MARCI URBAN DRAMA VICE P

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Kelly Hartman Board President
Randy Brown Officer
Mary Ann Brown Officer
Tasha Walls Treasurer
Carol Frederick Officer
Michael Pope Officer
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 11 other orgs in PA with NTEE prefix A1.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 10 points below the peer median (15 vs. 25).

5-year trend: Steady State

No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.

Overall score has gone from 39 → 37 over 5 years (declining by 2 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.