Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
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
52
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
60
Score

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
2023 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2022 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2020 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2019 55 Fragile Recovery
2018 56 Fragile Recovery
2017 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 49 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 52 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Peter Horvitz Board President
Dan Kingston Board President
Carl Behnke Board President
Joan Fitzmaurice Secretary
Dan Heidt Treasurer
Aya Hamilton Board Member
Phil Schlaepfer Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Aya Hamilton Board Member
Phil Schlaepfer Board Member
Carl Behnke Board President
Peter Horvitz Board President
Dan Kingston Board President
Dan Heidt Treasurer
Joan Fitzmaurice Secretary

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Aya Hamilton Board Member
Phil Schlaepfer Board Member
Carl Behnke Board President
Peter Horvitz Board President
Dan Kingston Board President
Dan Heidt Treasurer
Joan Fitzmaurice Secretary
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
50 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
52 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 235 other orgs in WA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 28 points above the peer median (60 vs. 32).

5-year trend: Steady State

No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.

Overall score has gone from 55 → 52 over 5 years (declining by 3 points).

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.