Insufficient Data
At least 3 years of filing history are required to project a trajectory.
Insufficient Data
Market
Archetype
Mechanical
Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint
Insufficient Data
What does this mean?
Not enough historical data to determine a longitudinal pattern.
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Insufficient Data ↓
Overall
32
Score
Governance
45
Score
Financial
30
Score
Program
15
Score
Title
-
Institutions
-
Avg Revenue
-
Risk Profile
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
2018
2019
2020
2021
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Insufficient Data
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | — | — | 25.0% | 32 | Critical Intervention Needed | Gov Risk | |
| 2019 | — | — | — | 37 | Financially Distressed | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2023
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COREY MCDANIEL | Artistic Director | 44.6% of Rev | ||
| ALBER GULLIAM FERNANDES | Board Member | 4.0% of Rev | ||
| JULIE BECKMAN | Board President | 1.5% of Rev | ||
| KEELAN SHIRKEY | Treasurer | — | ||
| TERI LAZZARA | Board Member | — | ||
| PATRICK SWETT | Board Member | — |
Tax year 2022
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COREY MCDANIEL | Artistic Director | 10.1% of Rev | ||
| ALBER GULLIAM FERNANDES | Board Member | 3.4% of Rev | ||
| JULIE BECKMAN | Board President | 2.6% of Rev | ||
| KEELAN SHIRKEY | Treasurer | — | ||
| TERI LAZZARA | Board Member | — | ||
| PATRICK SWETT | Board Member | — |
Tax year 2021
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| COREY MCDANIEL | Artistic Director | 16.1% of Rev | ||
| ALBER GULLIAM FERNANDES | Board Member | 8.9% of Rev | ||
| JULIE BECKMAN | Board President | — | ||
| KEELAN SHIRKEY | Treasurer | — |
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown
Score breakdown
Financial resilience
30 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
45 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
32 / 100
Priority Review
The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →
Peer comparison
Compared to 236 other orgs in WA with NTEE prefix A6.
Most-divergent component: program score sits 17 points below the peer median (15 vs. 32).
5-year trend: Insufficient Data
Not enough historical data to determine a longitudinal pattern.
Overall score has gone from 37 → 32 over 2 years (declining by 5 points).
What's driving this score
- Comp-to-revenue ratio of 25.0% is modestly above the sector's healthy band (18–22%) — worth monitoring.
- Financial resilience score in the bottom quartile — reserves and liabilities ratios warrant review.
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).
- 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.