Compensation Escalation Cycle
Compensation Escalation Cycle
Compensation Escalation Cycle Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Compensation Escalation Cycle

What does this mean?

Revenue grows modestly, but top officer compensation grows consistently for 5 years, breaching danger zones. The executive is negotiating aggressive raises against a compliant board.

The Path Forward

The Steward

Re-establishes board supremacy over executive extraction. It freezes compensation and mandates that all future financial rewards be tied strictly to verifiable mission expansion.

The Steward
The Steward
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Compensation Escalation Cycle
Overall
42
Score
Governance
45
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Compensation Escalation

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2023 Hidden Hidden 18.8% 42 Fragile Gov Risk
2022 0.1% 55 Fragile Recovery
2021 35 Fragile Gov Risk
2020 10.9% 38 Fragile Gov Risk
2019 8.5% 40 Fragile Recovery
2018 9.6% 42 Fragile Gov Risk
2017 2.0% 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 2.7% 52 Fragile Recovery
2015 61 Stable Decline Risk
2014 61 Stable Stable Watch
2013 61 Stable Stable Watch
2012 61 Stable Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Janet Husak Board Member 4.8% of Rev
Curt Germundsen Board President
Russ Rowcliffe Board President
Hope Cook Treasurer
Steve Wilson Board Member
Curt Germundsen Board President
Russ Rowcliffe Board President
Hope Cook Treasurer
Steve Wilson 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
45 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
42 / 100
Priority Review

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: Compensation Escalation Cycle

Revenue grows modestly, but top officer compensation grows consistently for 5 years, breaching danger zones. The executive is negotiating aggressive raises against a compliant board.

Overall score has gone from 40 → 42 over 5 years (improving by 2 points).

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. 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.