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
38
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
15
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 38 Financially Distressed Recovery
2022 32 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 50 Fragile Stable Watch
2020 46 Fragile Recovery
2019 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 51 Fragile Recovery
2017 47 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2016 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 51 Fragile Recovery
2014 43 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2013 47 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Malaika Osei Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Desiree Cocroft Chairman
Tecia Sellers Chairman
Malaika Osei Treasurer
Jessica Woolridge Executive Dir.
Bridget Robinson Secretary
Cierra Chesir Chairman
Andrew Ellis Chairman
Deana Velazquez Chairman
Adrian Lathan Chairman
Tamika Marable Chairman
Lynesha Oby Chairman
Symphony Swan Chairman
Desiree Cocroft Chairman
Tecia Sellers Chairman
Malaika Osei Treasurer
Jessica Woolridge Executive Dir.
Bridget Robinson Secretary
Cierra Chesir Chairman
Andrew Ellis Chairman
Deana Velazquez Chairman
Adrian Lathan Chairman
Tamika Marable Chairman
Lynesha Oby Chairman
Symphony Swan Chairman
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
15 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
38 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 182 other orgs in WI with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 41 points below the peer median (15 vs. 56).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 51 → 38 over 5 years (declining by 13 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. 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.