Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
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
48
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
40
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
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
2024 48 Fragile Stable Watch
2023 Hidden Hidden 48 Fragile Stable Watch
2022 48 Fragile Decline Risk
2021 55 Fragile Recovery
2020 48 Fragile Recovery
2019 48 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 48 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 48 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 45 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 45 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 48 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 48 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 48 Fragile Decline Risk
2011 52 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MICHAEL BARTH Board Member
JAY DOYLE Board Member
REANNA LANGE Board Member
JENNIFER PLUTE Board Member
ROBBIE TAYLOR Board Member
SHEILA YOUNGBLOOD Board Member
JOCELYN DODGE Board President
KATIE GREEN Board President
MARIA POCHERVINA Secretary

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ROBBIE TAYLOR Board Member
SHEILA YOUNGBLOOD Board Member
JAY DOYLE Board Member
MICHAEL BARTH Board Member
REANNA LANGE Board Member
JENNIFER PLUTE Board Member
JOCELYN DODGE Board President
KATIE GREEN Board President
MARIA POCHERVINA Secretary
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
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
48 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 16 other orgs in MT with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 21 points above the peer median (60 vs. 39).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 48 → 48 over 5 years (stable by 0 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.