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.
Title
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | — | — | — | 46 | Financially Distressed | Recovery | |
| 2019 | — | — | — | 45 | Financially Distressed | Stable Watch | |
| 2018 | — | — | — | 41 | Financially Distressed | Recovery | |
| 2016 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2015 | — | — | — | 25 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2014 | — | — | — | 47 | Fragile | Stable Watch | |
| 2013 | — | — | — | 45 | Fragile | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2021
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GEORGI RUSAFOV | Board President | — | ||
| TARA RUSAFOV | Board Member | — | ||
| JAMES HACK | Board Member | — | ||
| NAOMI MARTINEZ | Board Member | — | ||
| ERICK MARTINEZ | Board Member | — |
Score breakdown
The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →
Peer comparison
Compared to 118 other orgs in AZ with NTEE prefix A6.
Most-divergent component: financial score sits 24 points above the peer median (55 vs. 31).
5-year trend: Steady State
No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.
Overall score has gone from 25 → 46 over 5 years (improving by 21 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.
What's driving this score
- All-volunteer org with no paid officers — governance signal is neutral (default 50), not absent.
- Net assets declined for 4 consecutive years of deficit spending; cash runway narrowing.
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- 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.