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.
Title
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | — | — | — | 26 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2021 | — | — | — | 45 | Fragile | Decline Risk | |
| 2020 | — | — | — | 59 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2019 | — | — | — | 55 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2018 | — | — | — | 51 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2017 | — | — | — | 41 | Fragile | Decline Risk | |
| 2016 | — | — | — | 61 | Stable | Stable Watch | |
| 2015 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2014 | — | — | — | 37 | Financially Distressed | Recovery | |
| 2013 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch | |
| 2012 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2023
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SUZY WALKEFIELD | Board President | — | ||
| SALLY E BUCKINGHAM | Treasurer | — | ||
| JUDI KALITZI | VICE PRESIDE | — | ||
| MARY SCOTT | Secretary | — |
Score breakdown
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 32 points below the peer median (0 vs. 32).
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.
Overall score has gone from 51 → 26 over 5 years (declining by 25 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.
What's driving this score
- All-volunteer org with no paid officers — governance signal is neutral (default 50), not absent.
- Financial resilience score in the bottom quartile — reserves and liabilities ratios warrant review.
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- Build cash reserves to at least 3 months of operating expenses — moves financial resilience score meaningfully (~10 points).
Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.