Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
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
45
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 12.8% 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 47 Fragile Recovery
2021 39.7% 38 Governance-Stressed Recovery
2020 41 Fragile Recovery
2019 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Benjamin Nilles Artistic Director 9.4% of Rev
Sheila Wilcox Concertmaster 1.4% of Rev
Jeralyn Spampinato Board Member 0.5% of Rev
Tracey Gibbens Board Member 0.5% of Rev
Hannah Sipola Secretary 0.4% of Rev
Karen McManus Treasurer 0.4% of Rev
Norman Ferris Board Member 0.1% of Rev
Lynette Pearson Board Member 0.0% of Rev
Julie Sandstede Board President 0.0% of Rev
James Wachter Board President

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Benjamin Nilles Artistic Director 8.5% of Rev
Sheila Wilcox Concertmaster 1.3% of Rev
Tracey Gibbens Board Member 0.2% of Rev
James Wachter Board President 0.1% of Rev
Ethan Bexell Board President
Karen McManus Treasurer
Hannah Sipola Seretary
Norman Ferris III Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
50 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
45 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 175 other orgs in MN with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 13 points above the peer median (50 vs. 37).

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

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

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