Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
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
61
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
90
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2023 61 Stable Stable Watch
2022 64 Stable Stable Watch
2021 64 Stable Stable Watch
2020 61 Stable Stable Watch
2019 51 Fragile Decline Risk
2018 57 Fragile Recovery
2016 45 Fragile Recovery
2015 30.9% 28 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2014 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 35 Fragile Recovery
2012 41.2% 24 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2011 37.0% 24 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Kimberly J Johnson Board President
Megan Williams Executive Director
Cathie Hudnall Artistic Director
Luis Falcon Board Member
Stephanie Voss Board Member
Jacques Murphy Board Member
Katherine Jones Board Member
Barrie Herman Program Manager
Ricky Saucedo Board Member
Michael Snell Board Member
Samuel Saavedra Board Member
Kimberly Johnson Board President
Patrick Kinsella Board Member
Megan Williams Executive Director
Cathie Hudnall Artistic Director
Stephanie Voss Board Member
Jason Lichstein Treasurer
Jacques Murphy Board Member
Carl Rieke Board Member
Samuel Saavedra Board Member
Brian Gillette Controller
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
90 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
61 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 123 other orgs in GA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 54 points above the peer median (90 vs. 36).

5-year trend: Steady State

No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.

Overall score has gone from 51 → 61 over 5 years (improving by 10 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

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.