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
19
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden 19 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2023 Hidden Hidden 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 21 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 22 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2020 36 Fragile Recovery
2019 24 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 43 Fragile Recovery
2017 28 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 41 Fragile Recovery
2015 32 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 43 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DAVID ALLEN Executive Director
TERRY STEWART Board President
ANTHONY CALZARETTA Board Member
RAYMOND YOUNG Treasurer

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DAVID ALLEN Executive Director
TERRY STEWART Board President
ANTHONY CALZARETTA Board Member
RAYMOND YOUNG Treasurer

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DAVID ALLEN Executive Director
TERRY STEWART Board President
ANTHONY CALZARETTA Board Member
RAYMOND YOUNG Treasurer
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
0 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
19 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 43 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A5.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 40 points below the peer median (0 vs. 40).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 36 → 19 over 5 years (declining by 17 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

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.