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
33
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
20
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 Hidden Hidden 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 30.0% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 15.1% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
HARVEY LOCKHART Executive Director 39.3% of Rev
LYNELL BOYD Treasurer
KIM AUSMER Board President
NICHOL GORDON Secretary
DAVE CASTRO Board Member
JADE HALBERT Board Member
DON COOK Board Member
CARLTON ADAMS Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
HARVEY LOCKHART Executive Director 11.5% of Rev
HARVEY LOCKHART Executive Director 6.2% of Rev
DON COOK Secretary
THOMAS SILER Board President
DIANA HASKEL Secretary
DON COOK Secretary
RITA GOLIAY Treasurer
DAVE CASTRO Board Member
NICHOL GORDON Board Member
KIMBERLY AUSMER Board Member
DR JADE HALBERT Board Member
ROCHELLE WALKER Board Member
DAVE CASTRO Board Member
NICHOL GORDON Board Member
KIMBERLY AUSMER Board Member
DIANA HASKEL Secretary
THOMAS SILER Board President
RITA GOLIAY Treasurer
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
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
33 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 93 other orgs in MO with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 45 points below the peer median (20 vs. 65).

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.