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
30
Score
Program
15
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 Hidden Hidden 33 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2022 43 Fragile Recovery
2021 57.2% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2020 64.0% 42 Governance-Stressed Recovery
2019 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2018 45 Fragile Recovery
2017 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 49 Fragile Recovery
2015 45 Fragile Recovery
2014 37 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2013 43 Fragile Recovery
2012 39 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2011 41 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Kelly Thompson Artistic Director 19.3% of Rev
Alexandra Braeger Orchestra Manager 11.0% of Rev
Adrienne Prosser Treasurer 4.4% of Rev
Van Merritt Librarian 3.2% of Rev
Amanda Watkins Orchestra Manager 2.2% of Rev
Ruth Mollman Board President
Sharon Young Board President
Don Parkison Secretary

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Kelly Thompson Artistic Director 21.1% of Rev
Amanda Watkins Orchestra Manager 14.6% of Rev
Van Merritt Librarian 3.5% of Rev
Ruth Mollman Board President
Sharon Young Board President
Don Parkison Secretary
Adrienne Prosser Treasurer
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
30 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 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 270 other orgs in CO with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 20 points below the peer median (30 vs. 50).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 41 → 33 over 5 years (declining by 8 points).

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.