Governance Lag
Governance Lag
Governance Lag Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Governance Lag

What does this mean?

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

The Path Forward

The Scaffold

Brings immediate structural maturity. It represents the necessity of outside, independent oversight to manage new scale, breaking the echo chamber of a founding 'friends and family' board.

The Scaffold
The Scaffold
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Governance Lag
Overall
43
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
55
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Governance Lag

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2022 43 Fragile Recovery
2021 23 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2020 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2019 26 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 37 Fragile Recovery
2014 23 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Chawndese Hylton Board President
Darwana N Black Treasurer

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Saleem Hylton Board President
Chawndese Hylton Board President
Darwana N Black Treasurer
Beverly Lindsay-Johnson Secretary

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Beverly Lindsay-Johnson Executive Director
ChawndeseHylton Board President
Darwana Black Treasurer
Dr N Saleem Hylton Board President
Dr Kilolo Ajanaku Board President
Farida Muhammad Treasurer
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
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
43 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 56 other orgs in DC with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 30 points above the peer median (55 vs. 25).

5-year trend: Governance Lag

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

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.