Mission Drift
Mission Drift
Mission Drift Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
Trajectory Thumbprint

Mission Drift

What does this mean?

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

The Path Forward

The Lodestar

A radical recommitment to the core mission. It requires the organization to gain the strength to say 'no' to restricted funding that pulls them away from their true purpose.

The Lodestar
The Lodestar
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Mission Drift ↑
Overall
53
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
80
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Mission Drift

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2023 — — — 53 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 — — — 64 Stable Stable Watch
2021 — — — 40 Fragile Recovery
2020 — — — 61 Stable Stable Watch
2019 — — — 41 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
BARBARA ALTLAND BOARD PRESID —
JOAN LUNDBORG Vice President —
GLENN BEAVIS BOARD TREASU —
DAVID MOUL Board Member —
JENNIFER GWILLIM Board Member —
DEBORA WHITAKER Board Member —
FRANK GALANTE Board Member —
GARY KING Board Member —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
BARBARA ALTLAND BOARD PRESID —
JOAN LUNDBORG Vice President —
GLENN BEAVIS BOARD TREASU —
DAVID MOUL Board Member —
ROBERT SCHULTZ Board Member —
DEBORA WHITAKER Board Member —
FRANK GALANTE Board Member —
GARY KING Board Member —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
BARBARA ALTLAND BOARD PRESID —
JOAN LUNDBORG Vice President —
GLENN BEAVIS BOARD TREASU —
DAVID MOUL Board Member —
ROBERT SCHULTZ Board Member —
DEBORA WHITAKER Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
80 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
53 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 280 other orgs in MI with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 26 points above the peer median (80 vs. 54).

5-year trend: Mission Drift

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

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.