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
27
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
20
Score
Program
5
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
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 27 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 82.3% 24 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2021 37 Fragile Recovery
2020 140.9% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2019 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 41 Fragile Recovery
2017 33 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 41 Fragile Recovery
2013 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Caron Dale Executive Director 73.6% of Rev
Steven Zaleznick Treasurer
Cheryl Keamy Board Of Directors
Cheryl Cooper Board Of Directors

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Caron Dale Executive Director 70.8% of Rev
Steven Zaleznick Treasurer
Cheryl Keamy Board Of Directors
Cheryl Cooper Board Of Directors

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Caron Dale Executive Director 59.0% of Rev
Steven Zaleznick Treasurer
Cheryl Keamy Board Of Directors
Cheryl Cooper Board Of Directors
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
20 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
27 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 59 other orgs in DC with NTEE prefix A3.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 60 points below the peer median (20 vs. 80).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

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.