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
35
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
40
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
2025 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2024 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2023 Hidden Hidden 39.0% 35 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2022 — — — 41 Fragile Recovery
2021 — — 20.9% 43 Fragile Recovery
2020 — — 11.0% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2019 — — 5.7% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 — — 21.9% 26 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2017 — — 9.7% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2016 — — 12.9% 25 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 — — 15.4% 22 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 — — — 41 Financially Distressed Recovery
2013 — — — 33 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 — — — 37 Financially Distressed Recovery
2011 — — — 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
KIM TUCKER RESIGNED 42025 FORMER EXEC 36.3% of Rev
DOUGLAS DREWES AS OF 622025 EXECUTIVE DI 24.0% of Rev
ROBERT BERGBAUER Secretary —
HARRY HAYMAN Board Member —
JUDITH HERBST Treasurer —
KEVIN JOHNSON Board President —
PAUL KRASSEN Board Member —
MEG NORTH Board Member —
IAN SADOCK Board Member —
KHAALEEDAH SMITH FORMER DIREC —
KEVIN VALENTINE Board Member —
KYRA STEWART Board Member —

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
KIM TUCKER EXECUTIVE DI 35.0% of Rev
DOUG DREWES Board Member 4.0% of Rev
KEVIN JOHNSON Board President —
JUDITH HERBST Treasurer —
ROBERT BERGBAUER Board Member —
KEVIN VALENTINE Board Member —
KHAALEEDAH SMITH Board Member —
PAUL KRASSEN Board Member —
IAN SADOCK Board Member —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
KIM E TUCKER EXECUTIVE DI 25.6% of Rev
RHENDA FEARRINGTON Board President —
CAROL ROGERS Board Member —
ALAN LEWINE Board Member —
KEVIN JOHNSON VICE PRESIDE —
JANET PARRISH Treasurer —
JUDITH HERBST Secretary —
WATSON WILKINS Board Member —
KEVIN VALENTINE Board Member —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JOSEPH L LEWIS III EXECUTIVE DI 10.9% of Rev
RHENDA FEARRINGTON Board President —
CAROL ROGERS Secretary —
ALAN LEWINE Board Member —
KEVIN JOHNSON VICE PRESIDE —
JANET PARRISH Treasurer —
JUDITH HERBST Secretary —
AARON P BROWN Board Member —
WATSON WILKINS Board Member —

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JOSEPH L LEWIS III EXECUTIVE DI 8.9% of Rev
RHENDA FEARRINGTON Board President —
CAROL ROGERS Secretary —
ALAN LEWINE Board Member —
KEVIN JOHNSON VICE PRESIDE —
JANET PARRISH Treasurer —
JUDITH HERBST Board Member —
AARON P BROWN Board Member —
WATSON WILKINS Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
40 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
35 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 462 other orgs in PA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: governance score sits 21 points below the peer median (42 vs. 63).

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 39.0% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~34 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.