Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
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
50
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
45
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 10.6% 50 Fragile Recovery
2023 17.8% 37 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2022 14.0% 43 Fragile Recovery
2021 24.8% 39 Fragile Gov Risk
2020 36.9% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2019 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2017 49 Fragile Recovery
2016 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2014 49 Fragile Decline Risk
2013 49 Fragile Recovery
2012 45 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
TONI ASHER Executive Director 11.1% of Rev
JULIE HATLEM Board Member
JULIE GUMZ Board Member
JENNIFER GANDER Board Member
AMANDA FLORENCE GARCIA GOODENOUGH Board Member
AJ FRELS Board Member
ROBIN CROSBY Board President
ANDREW WESTRICH Board President
CLAUDIA WEINBERGER TREASURERSECRETARY

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Toni Asher Executive Director 11.2% of Rev
Robin Cosby Board President
Andrew Westrich Board President
Claudia Weinberger Treasurer
Craig Hanson Board President
Nick Dutton Board Member
AJ Frels Board Member
Ashley Stussy Secretary
Shannon Givens Board Member
Jehona Osmani Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
45 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
50 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 20 other orgs in WI with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 31 points above the peer median (60 vs. 29).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 34 → 50 over 5 years (improving by 16 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

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.