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
43
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
65
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden 30.8% 43 Governance-Stressed Gov Risk
2023 50 Fragile Recovery
2022 40.2% 57 Governance-Stressed Recovery
2021 56 Fragile Recovery
2020 50 Fragile Recovery
2019 47 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2017 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 51 Fragile Decline Risk
2015 55 Fragile Recovery
2014 51 Fragile Decline Risk
2013 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 55 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DAN HEERTS Board Member 23.9% of Rev
RENEE JANDT BUSINESS MAN 6.9% of Rev

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DAN HEERTS Board Member 22.5% of Rev
RENEE JANDT BUSINESS MAN 7.7% of Rev

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
CHRISTINE KRUEGER BOARD
CYNDY NICHOLS BOARD
DEE EHRSAM BOARD
ELLEN THORN Board President
JEAN SOLBERG Secretary
JODIE CURTIS BOARD
JULIE BAKER BOARD
KELLI MARTIN Treasurer
PEGGY GREEN Board President
PEGGY LANGRECK BOARD
TERESA NEWTON Board President
TERRI LENSELINK Board President

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DANIEL D HEERTS Board Member
RENEE JANDT BUSINESS MANAGER
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
65 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
43 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 20 other orgs in WI with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 18 points above the peer median (65 vs. 47).

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. Reduce top-officer compensation from 30.8% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~18 points.
  2. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).

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