Institutional Maturation
Institutional Maturation
Institutional Maturation Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
Trajectory Thumbprint

Institutional Maturation

What does this mean?

The gold standard. 10-year slow, steady, concurrent growth across Financial Health, Governance, and Program. Leadership is scaling their oversight and impact in lockstep.

The Path Forward

The Crown

A mandate to lead the sector. It encourages the organization to mentor emerging nonprofits and embark on generational capital projects, leveraging their profound stability.

The Crown
The Crown
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Institutional Maturation
Overall
54
Score
Governance
58
Score
Financial
80
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Institutional Maturation

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2021 0.5% 54 Fragile Recovery
2020 37 Fragile Recovery
2019 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2013 27 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2012 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2011 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Robert Miller Board President 0.5% of Rev
James McTiernan Board President
Sherrie Miller Secretary
Edward Hendriksen Treasurer
Linda Hill Board Member
James Pearson Board Member
Gerald Peterson Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
80 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
58 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
54 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 186 other orgs in MI with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 39 points above the peer median (80 vs. 41).

5-year trend: Institutional Maturation

The gold standard. 10-year slow, steady, concurrent growth across Financial Health, Governance, and Program. Leadership is scaling their oversight and impact in lockstep.

Overall score has gone from 27 → 54 over 5 years (improving by 27 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Stabilize program expenses or grow earned-income revenue to break the consecutive-deficit pattern (~8 points to financial score).

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