Compensation Escalation Cycle
Compensation Escalation Cycle
Compensation Escalation Cycle Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Compensation Escalation Cycle

What does this mean?

Revenue grows modestly, but top officer compensation grows consistently for 5 years, breaching danger zones. The executive is negotiating aggressive raises against a compliant board.

The Path Forward

The Steward

Re-establishes board supremacy over executive extraction. It freezes compensation and mandates that all future financial rewards be tied strictly to verifiable mission expansion.

The Steward
The Steward
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Compensation Escalation Cycle ↑
Overall
38
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
45
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
Compensation Escalation

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2023 — — 42.4% 38 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2022 — — — 42 Fragile Recovery
2021 — — 52.9% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2020 — — 45.2% 38 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2019 — — 34.4% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 — — 27.4% 22 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 — — 28.6% 22 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 — — 27.7% 20 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 — — 17.2% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2014 — — 48.0% 20 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 — — 36.2% 28 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2012 — — — 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2011 — — — 51 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Janel Amsallem Employee 26.1% of Rev
Judith Employee 16.2% of Rev
Kate Gavos Board President —
Diana Miranda Vice President —
Sarah Lindblom Vice President —
Rachel Lankdford Treasurer —
Helen Hays Secretary —
Robert Miranda FacilityStudio Coordinator —
LeAnn Boatright Board Member —
Agnes Allego Board Member —
Brenda Brannen Board Member —
Casey Miller Higgins Board Member —
Kristin Peek Howrey Board Member —
Amy Nino Board Member —
Rachel Santos Board Member —
Emily York Board Member —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Janel Amsallem Employee 26.7% of Rev
Judith Grywalski Employee 16.1% of Rev
Rachel Lankford Board President —
Kate Gavos Board President —
Helen Hays Secretary —
Mandi Sonnenfeld Treasurer —
Casey Higgins Board Member —
Rachel Santos Board Member —
Cheri Coleman Board Member —
Brenda Brannen Board Member —
Bret Howrey Board Member —
Robert Miranda Board Member —
Agnes Allego Board Member —
Kristen Peek Board Member —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Janel Amsallem Employee 25.7% of Rev
Judith Grywalski Employee 15.2% of Rev
Rachel Lankford Board President —
Kate Gavos Board President —
Helen Hays Secretary —
Mandi Sonnenfeld Treasurer —
Casey Higgins Board Member —
Rachel Santos Building/Set Coordinator —
Cheri Coleman Board Member —
Brenda Brannen Board Member —
Bret Howrey Board Member —
Robert Miranda Board Member —
Agnes Allego Board Member —
Kristen Peek Board Member —

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JANEL AMSALLEM EMPLOYEE/ART DI 20.0% of Rev
JUDITH GRYWALSKI EMPLOYEE 13.0% of Rev
RACHEL LANKFORD Board President —
STACY SELL-FOULKS Board President —
HELEN HAYS Secretary —
HAPPY SPILLAR Treasurer —
RACHEL SANTOS BUILDING/SET CO —
LYNN NIGLIAZZO Artistic Director —
AGNES ALLEGO Board Member —
BRENDA BRANNEN Board Member —
CHERI COLEMAN Board Member —
BRET HOWREY Board Member —
KRISTEN PEEK Board Member —
KAREN KISLINGBURY Board Member —
ROBERT MIRANDA Board Member —
BELINDA MILLINDER Board Member —
MANDI SONNENFELD Board Member —
JANET TALBERT Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
45 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
38 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 483 other orgs in TX with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: governance score sits 33 points below the peer median (42 vs. 75).

5-year trend: Compensation Escalation Cycle

Revenue grows modestly, but top officer compensation grows consistently for 5 years, breaching danger zones. The executive is negotiating aggressive raises against a compliant board.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Reduce top-officer compensation from 42.4% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~40 points.
  2. 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.