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
42
Score
Financial
55
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

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
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 32.0% 35 Governance-Stressed Gov Risk
2022 43 Fragile Recovery
2021 87.2% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2020 60 Stable Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Orlando Rivera Executive Director 32.0% of Rev
Rachel Alicea Board Member
Nelson Gonzalez Secretary
Maria Vazquez Treasurer
Carmen Kurban Board Member
Nereida Santiago Secretary

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Orlando Rivera Executive Director 32.0% of Rev
Jaime R Santana Board President
Nelson Gonzalez Secretary
Maria Vazquez Treasurer
Carmen Kurban Board Member
Nereida Santiago Secretary

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Orlando Rivera Executive Director 24.0% of Rev
Elsie Albelo Board Member
Jaime R Santana Board President
Nelson Gonzalez Secretary
Maria Vazquez Treasurer
Carmen Kurban Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Jaime R Santana Board President
Nelson Gonzalez Secretary
Orlando Rivera Executive Director
Maria Vazquez Treasurer
Carmen Kurban Board Member
Elsie Albelo Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
55 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 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 195 other orgs in IL with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 20 points above the peer median (55 vs. 35).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Reduce top-officer compensation from 32.0% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~20 points.
  2. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).

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