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
37
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
45
Score
Program
5
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 — — — 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 — — — 43 Fragile Recovery
2021 — — — 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2020 — — — 41 Fragile Recovery
2019 — — — 37 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 — — — 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2017 — — — 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 — — — 55 Fragile Recovery
2015 — — — 51 Fragile Recovery
2014 — — — 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 — — — 41 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Kenneth J Krause Board President —
Chris DesAutels Board President —
Michael Cerullo Treasurer —
May Marquebreuck Secretary —
Richard Pelland Board Member —
Wayne Johnson Board Member —
Robert K Legon Board Member —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Kenneth J Krause Board President —
Chris DesAutels Board President —
Michael Cerullo Treasurer —
May Marquebreuck Secretary —
Richard Pelland Board Member —
Robert K Legon Board Member —
Wayne Johnson Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
45 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
37 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 376 other orgs in MA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 24 points below the peer median (5 vs. 29).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 37 → 37 over 5 years (stable by 0 points).

What's driving this score

What would change this score

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.