Mission Drift
Mission Drift
Mission Drift Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Mission Drift

What does this mean?

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

The Path Forward

The Lodestar

A radical recommitment to the core mission. It requires the organization to gain the strength to say 'no' to restricted funding that pulls them away from their true purpose.

The Lodestar
The Lodestar
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Mission Drift
Overall
29
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
5
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Mission Drift

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 6.6% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2022 64 Stable Decline Risk
2021 68 Stable Stable Watch
2020 48 Fragile Recovery
2019 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 51 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
BRAD RACKERS Treasurer 7.3% of Rev
KENNETH TAYLOR Secretary 1.2% of Rev
REBECCA STABNO Board President 0.8% of Rev
STAN COLE VICE PRESIDE 0.2% of Rev

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
REBECCA STABNO Board President
BRAD RACKERS Treasurer
STAN COLE Board President
KENNETH TAYLOR Secretary

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
REBECCA STABNO Board President
BRAD RACKERS Board President
JAMILEE MEDIAK Treasurer
KENNETH TAYLOR Secretary

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
REBECCA STABNO CHAIRMAN
BRAD RACKERS VICE PRESIDE
JAMILEE MEDIAK Treasurer
KENNETH TAYLOR Secretary
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
5 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
29 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 104 other orgs in MO with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 34 points below the peer median (5 vs. 39).

5-year trend: Mission Drift

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

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).

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