Steady State
Steady State
Market
Archetype
Mechanical
Natural
Tier
Priority Review
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
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Steady State ↓
Overall
39
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
65
Score
Program
15
Score
Title
-
Institutions
-
Avg Revenue
-
Risk Profile
Representative Institutions
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Hidden | Hidden | — | — | Unknown | — | |
| 2024 | Hidden | Hidden | — | — | Unknown | — | |
| 2023 | Hidden | Hidden | 36.6% | 39 | Governance-Stressed | Recovery | |
| 2022 | — | — | — | 34 | Critical Intervention Needed | Gov Risk | |
| 2021 | — | — | 27.3% | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Gov Risk | |
| 2020 | — | — | 16.9% | 46 | Fragile | Decline Risk | |
| 2019 | — | — | — | 54 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2018 | — | — | — | 47 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2017 | — | — | — | 41 | Financially Distressed | Stable Watch | |
| 2016 | — | — | — | 41 | Financially Distressed | Stable Watch | |
| 2015 | — | — | — | 41 | Financially Distressed | Recovery | |
| 2014 | — | — | — | 37 | Financially Distressed | Recovery | |
| 2013 | — | — | — | 27 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2012 | — | — | — | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch | |
| 2011 | — | — | — | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2025
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CRISTA STANLEY | Executive Director | 22.0% of Rev | ||
| NIKKI CLARK | Treasurer | 7.6% of Rev | ||
| INGA SWEARINGEN | Board Member | 5.2% of Rev | ||
| SUSANNAH FLETCHER | Board Member | 1.9% of Rev | ||
| Stu Stoddard | Board President | — | ||
| Trina Hirsig | Secretary | — | ||
| Nikki Clark | Treasurer | — | ||
| Susannah Fletcher | Board Member | — | ||
| Steinar Svennungsen | Board Member | — | ||
| Inga Swearingen | Board Member | — | ||
| Crista Stanley | Executive Dir. | — | ||
| Melody Sevennungsen | Board Member | — | ||
| Tracy Gibson | Board Member | — | ||
| STU STODDARD | Board President | — | ||
| TRINA HIRSIG | Secretary | — | ||
| STEINAR SVENNUNGSEN | Board Member | — |
Tax year 2023
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JILL WHALEY | Executive Director | 15.0% of Rev | ||
| ALICIA BORLODAN | Board President | — | ||
| BILL DENNISON | Board President | — | ||
| SANDRA EATHERLY | Secretary | — | ||
| KELLY HAGERMAN | Treasurer | — |
Tax year 2022
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| JILL WHALEY | Executive Director | 15.3% of Rev | ||
| ALICIA BORLODAN | Board President | — | ||
| BILL DENNISON | Board President | — | ||
| SANDRA EATHERLY | Secretary | — | ||
| KELLY HAGERMAN | Treasurer | — | ||
| DONNA JONES PART YEAR | Board Member | — | ||
| STEINAR SVENNUNGSEN PART YEAR | Board Member | — | ||
| STEPHANIE TARICA PART YEAR | Board Member | — | ||
| MARK PADGETT PART YEAR | Board Member | — | ||
| AMY GILLHAM PART YEAR | Board Member | — |
Tax year 2021
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BILL DENNISON | Board Member | — | ||
| STEINAR SVENNUNGSEN | Board Member | — | ||
| STEPHANIE TARICA | Board Member | — | ||
| AMY GILLHAM | Board Member | — | ||
| ALICIA BORLODAN | Board President | — | ||
| SANDRA EATHERLY | Secretary | — | ||
| KELLY HAGERMAN | Treasurer | — | ||
| DONNA JONES | Board Member | — | ||
| MARK PADGETT | Board President | — |
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown
Score breakdown
Financial resilience
65 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
39 / 100
Priority Review
The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →
Peer comparison
Compared to 829 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A6.
Most-divergent component: financial score sits 32 points above the peer median (65 vs. 33).
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 36.6% is above the 90th percentile for orgs of this size (healthy band: 18–22%).
- Two consecutive years of deficit spending.
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- Reduce top-officer compensation from 36.6% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~29 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.