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
42
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
55
Score
Program
30
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 25.6% 42 Governance-Stressed Gov Risk
2022 1.7% 50 Fragile Recovery
2021 43 Fragile Recovery
2020 18.1% 38 Fragile Decline Risk
2019 49 Fragile Decline Risk
2018 57 Fragile Recovery
2017 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 57 Fragile Recovery
2015 49 Fragile Decline Risk
2014 53 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 57 Fragile Recovery
2012 49 Fragile Decline Risk
2011 53 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Mark Thode Manager 25.6% of Rev
Bronwyn Jones Board President
Travis Lund Treasurer
Reggie Gorter Secretary
Mick Myers Board Member
Zachary Ploeger Board Member
Mary Ann Yseth Board Member
Dennis Hansen Board Member
Monica Sullivan Board Member
Taya DeRycke Board Member
Kyle Kuphal Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Mark Thode Manager 2.0% of Rev
Bronwyn Jones Board President
Paul Johnson Treasurer
Rest of Board - Four Members Board Members

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Mark Thode Manager 12.9% of Rev
Bronwyn Jones Board President
Paul Johnson Treasurer
Rest of Board - Four Members Board Members
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
55 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 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 174 other orgs in MN with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 18 points above the peer median (55 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

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).
  2. Reduce top-officer compensation from 25.6% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~7 points.

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