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
25
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
15
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2017 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 37 Fragile Recovery
2013 33 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 37 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 37 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
RAY MORENO Board President
NATHAN PHUNG Vice President
PATRICE COOLEY County Represen
STEVEN STOCKMAN Treasurer
VANESSA DUCKWORTH Secretary
AUSTIN MEINERS Board President

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
RAY MORENO Board President
NATHAN PHUNG Vice President
PATRICE COOLEY County Represen
STEVEN STOCKMAN Treasurer
VANESSA DUCKWORTH Secretary
AUSTIN MEINERS Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
15 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
25 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 171 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 25 points below the peer median (5 vs. 30).

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. 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.