Mission Drift
Mission Drift
Mission Drift Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Mission Drift

What does this mean?

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

The Path Forward

The Lodestar

A radical recommitment to the core mission. It requires the organization to gain the strength to say 'no' to restricted funding that pulls them away from their true purpose.

The Lodestar
The Lodestar
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Mission Drift
Overall
23
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
10
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Mission Drift

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2023 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2022 42 Fragile Recovery
2021 22 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2020 77.0% 13 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2019 5.0% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 29.8% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 27.4% 42 Governance-Stressed Gov Risk
2016 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 43 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 41 Fragile Recovery
2012 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2011 45 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Angela Amoroso Treasurer
Andrew Skinner Board President
Miah Nwosu Secretary
Mary Chaparro Board Member
Barbara Dower Board Member
Carlo D'Benedictis Board Member
Jeff Yoemans Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ANGELA AMOROSO Treasurer 542.2% of Rev
ANDREW SKINNER Board President
MIAH NWOSU Secretary
MARY CHAPARRO Board Member
BARBARA DOWER Board Member
CARLO D'BENEDICTIS Board Member
JEFF YEOMANS Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
10 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
23 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 829 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 27 points below the peer median (5 vs. 32).

5-year trend: Mission Drift

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

Overall score has gone from 30 → 23 over 5 years (declining by 7 points).

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.