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
35
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
25
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2013
2014
2015
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 35 Fragile Recovery
2022 34 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2020 36 Financially Distressed Recovery
2019 35 Fragile Recovery
2018 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 35 Fragile Recovery
2016 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 35 Fragile Decline Risk
2014 39 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Roy Slagle Treasurer
Kelly McMullen Secretary
Jennifer Slagle Treasurer
Kristen Black Board President
Josephine Sze Board President

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Jennifer Slagle Treasurer
Roy Slagle Treasurer
Karrie Converse-Jones SecretaryCommunications
Tricia Moffitt Board President
Bob Barcus Board President
Kelly Barcus Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
25 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
35 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 212 other orgs in OH with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 16 points below the peer median (25 vs. 41).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 35 → 35 over 5 years (stable by 0 points).

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Build cash reserves to at least 3 months of operating expenses — moves financial resilience score meaningfully (~10 points).
  2. 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.