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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Hidden | Hidden | — | — | Unknown | — | |
| 2023 | — | — | 32.9% | 34 | Critical Intervention Needed | Gov Risk | |
| 2022 | — | — | 40.9% | 40 | Governance-Stressed | Gov Risk | |
| 2020 | — | — | — | 51 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2019 | — | — | — | 47 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2018 | — | — | — | 43 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2017 | — | — | — | 41 | Fragile | Decline Risk | |
| 2016 | — | — | — | 47 | Fragile | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2025
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dennis Houser | Board Member | 26.1% of Rev | ||
| Mark Achuff | Accompanist | 3.1% of Rev | ||
| Lauree Birchmeir | Admin Assistant | 2.3% of Rev | ||
| Jacob Gilbert | Board Member | 1.3% of Rev | ||
| Kay Houser | Board President | — | ||
| Roger Olson | Board President | — | ||
| Linda Hoover | Secretary | — | ||
| Julie Heitz | Treasurer | — | ||
| John Euson | Board Member | — |
Tax year 2023
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dennis Houser | Board Member | 22.7% of Rev | ||
| Jacob Gilbert | Accompanist | 8.6% of Rev | ||
| Mark Achuff | Accompanist | 7.0% of Rev | ||
| Lauree Birchmeir | Admin Assistant | 3.6% of Rev | ||
| Dana Wingate | Board President | — | ||
| Sandy Johnson | Board President | — | ||
| Kay Wood-Houser | Secretary | — | ||
| Julie Heitz | Treasurer | — | ||
| Richard Lassiter | Board Member | — | ||
| Beth Wingate | Board Member | — | ||
| John Euson | 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: program score sits 17 points below the peer median (15 vs. 32).
5-year trend: Steady State
No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.
What's driving this score
- Comp-to-revenue ratio of 32.9% is above the 90th percentile for orgs of this size (healthy band: 18–22%).
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- Reduce top-officer compensation from 32.9% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~22 points.
- 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.