Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
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
51
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
75
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 51 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 4.0% 58 Fragile Decline Risk
2021 62 Stable Stable Watch
2020 59 Fragile Recovery
2019 51 Fragile Recovery
2018 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2017 51 Fragile Recovery
2016 47 Fragile Recovery
2015 43 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2014 47 Fragile Recovery
2013 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2011 49 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Amber Bartholomew Producer 2.2% of Rev
Douglas Gaertner Board President 1.9% of Rev
Phyllis Page Board Member 0.7% of Rev
Keysha Gardner Board Member
Ashleigh Lipes Board Member
Dan Miller Board Member
Gene Pettit Treasurer
Krista Pettit Board Member
Deb Taylor Board President
Carie Moerdyk Secretary
Dawn Reitano Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Amber Bartholomew Producer
Douglas Gaertner Board President
Keysha Gardner Board Member
Ashleigh Lipes Board Member
Sheri Meadows Board Member
Dan Miller Board Member
Phyllis Page Board Member
Gene Pettit Treasurer
Krista Pettit Board Member
Jody Siefker Marketing
Deb Taylor Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
75 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
51 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 185 other orgs in MI with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 34 points above the peer median (75 vs. 41).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 51 → 51 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.