Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
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
54
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2022 Hidden Hidden 9.8% 54 Fragile Recovery
2021 13.5% 40 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2020 18.4% 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2019 12.1% 48 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Jason Erby Executive Director 9.8% of Rev
Kelvin Harris Board Member
Kathryn McNorton Board Member
Jamie Kowlessar Board Member
Michelle Okyere Board Member
Jackie Amos Board Member
Johnathan McNorton Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Jason Erby Board President 9.8% of Rev
Jason Erby Board President 9.8% of Rev
Kelvin Harris Board Member
Kathryn McNorton Board Member
Michelle Okyere Board Member
Jackie Amos Board Member
Kelvin Harris Board Member
Johnathon McNorton Board Member
Kathryn McNorton Board Member
Jamie Kowlessar Board Member
Michelle Okyere Board Member
Jackie Amos Board Member
Johnathon McNorton Board Member
Jamie Kowlessar Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Jason Erby Board President 9.8% of Rev
Kelvin Harris Board Member
Kathryn McNorton Board Member
Michelle Okyere Board Member
Jackie Amos Board Member
Johnathon McNorton Board Member
Jamie Kowlessar Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
50 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
54 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 4 other orgs in TX with NTEE prefix A9.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 46 points above the peer median (60 vs. 14).

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. 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.