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
39
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
25
Score
Program
45
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
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 39 Fragile Recovery
2022 38 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2021 48 Fragile Recovery
2020 47 Fragile Recovery
2019 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 37 Fragile Recovery
2017 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2016 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 12.4% 35 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2014 35 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2013 13.9% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 35 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2011 35 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Tonya Brock Board President
Cindy Beckman Board President
Jeanne Foley Secretary
Madeline Jaaskela Officer At Large
Barbara Rasmussen Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Madeline Jaaskela Officer At Large
Barbara Rasmussen Treasurer
Jeanne Foley Secretary
Tonya Brock Board President
Cindy Beckman Board President

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Stephen Marchesseault Secretary
Mark Nadeau Officer At Large
Tonya Brock Board President
Michael Gallo Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
25 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
39 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 130 other orgs in CT with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 17 points above the peer median (45 vs. 28).

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.