Insufficient Data
At least 3 years of filing history are required to project a trajectory.
Insufficient Data Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
Trajectory Thumbprint

Insufficient Data

"Fosters a love for ballet in Northwest Arkansas by providing equitable access to high-quality training and performances, specifically targeting underserved communities and nurturing talent towards professional careers."

— Statement of Program Service Accomplishments

What does this mean?

Not enough historical data to determine a longitudinal pattern.

Demonstrated Impact

  • 20 students received full scholarship
  • over 1500 people in attendance
  • donated over 300 tickets
  • 90 residents of Butterfield Trail Retirement Village
  • 250 residents of Siloam Springs
  • 80 children at Fayetteville public library
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Insufficient Data
Overall
48
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
65
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Insufficient Data

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 36.4% 48 Fragile Gov Risk
2022 47 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
David Sanders Executive Director 25.7% of Rev
Kathryn Stasse Artistic Director 10.8% of Rev
Anne Maxey Board Member
Patricia Smith Board Member
Charlotte Wagner Board Member
Christine Hartmann Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
David Sanders Executive Director 14.0% of Rev
Kathryn Stasse Artistic Director 9.3% of Rev
Charlotte Wagner Board Member
Amy Kessler-Weber Board Member
Patricia Smith Board Member
Amanda Deegan Board Member
Ibou Jobe Board Member
Annie Maaxey Board Member
Carlen Hooker Board Member
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
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
48 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 34 other orgs in AR with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 37 points above the peer median (65 vs. 28).

5-year trend: Insufficient Data

Not enough historical data to determine a longitudinal pattern.

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 36.4% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~29 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.