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
41
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
55
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
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
2023 41 Fragile Recovery
2022 28 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2020 52 Fragile Recovery
2019 43 Fragile Recovery
2018 39 Financially Distressed Recovery
2017 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2016 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 35 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2014 35 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 41 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Steven Cassling Treasurer
Julann Warren Board Member
Brian Adams Secretary
Ty Christopher Warren Board President
Helen Adams Board Member
Elizabeth Wheat Board President

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Steven Cassling Treasurer
Julann Warren Board Member
Brian Adams Secretary
Ty Christopher Warren Board President
Helen Adams Board Member
Elizabeth Wheat Board President
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
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
41 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 171 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 25 points below the peer median (5 vs. 30).

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.

Overall score has gone from 43 → 41 over 5 years (declining by 2 points).

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.