Steady State
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
The Stewardship
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Steady State
Overall
27
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
25
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2021 44.3% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2020 30.3% 19 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2019 18.7% 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 5.4% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 19 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
RICHARD LINDO Board President 20.5% of Rev
JAY DESROSIER Board Member 20.2% of Rev
PATRICK MCBRIARTY Board Member 3.5% of Rev
BOB HOELTERHOFF Board President
JOSEPH G RICKARD Board Member
JOHN KRAFT Treasurer
GEORGE LOWE BOARD MEMMBER
JOHN GRANT CROWLEY Board Member
BRANDON CUNNINGHAM Board Member
GAIL SPREEN Board Member
TED CARTNER Board Member
DAMONE RICHARDSON Board Member
RANDY CONNOR Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
RICHARD LINDO Executive Director 11.1% of Rev
PATRICK MCBRIARTY PROGRAM COORDINATOR 8.5% of Rev
BOB HOELTERHOFF Board President
JOSEPH G RICKARD Board President
JOHN KRAFT Treasurer
GEORGE LOWE BOARD MEMMBER
JOHN GRANT CROWLEY Board Member
ERIC JOHNSTONE Board Member
BRANDON CUNNINGHAM Board Member
GREG RICKARD Board Member
TED CARTNER Board Member
DAMONE RICHARDSON Board Member
RANDY CONNOR Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
25 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
27 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 196 other orgs in IL with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 11 points below the peer median (25 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 19 → 27 over 5 years (improving by 8 points).

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 44.3% 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.