Acute Stabilization
Acute Stabilization
Acute Stabilization Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Acute Stabilization

What does this mean?

A successful crisis intervention. After hitting the Priority Review risk tier, the organization demonstrates consecutive years of Financial Score recovery paired with Governance Score improvement.

The Path Forward

The Dawn

Institutionalizes the emergency protocols that saved the organization. It locks in new, rigorous governance policies to prevent a relapse into crisis.

The Dawn
The Dawn
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Acute Stabilization
Overall
43
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
40
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Acute Stabilization

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2023 12.4% 43 Fragile Recovery
2022 36.1% 37 Governance-Stressed Recovery
2021 25.4% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2020 36.0% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2019 22.1% 37 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2018 10.1% 38 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2017 37 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2016 43 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 43 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Benjamin Mitchell Board President 15.4% of Rev
Ben Haeuser Board Member
Elizabeth Harre Board Member
Greg Castelnuovo-Tedesco Board Member
Randy Greif Board Member
Shirley Starke-Wallace Board Member
Viet Cuong Board Member
Robert Muller Board President
Rachel Rosenbaum Treasurer
Peter Kurie Secretary
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
40 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
43 / 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 14 points above the peer median (45 vs. 31).

5-year trend: Acute Stabilization

A successful crisis intervention. After hitting the Priority Review risk tier, the organization demonstrates consecutive years of Financial Score recovery paired with Governance Score improvement.

Overall score has gone from 37 → 43 over 5 years (improving by 6 points).

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Stabilize program expenses or grow earned-income revenue to break the consecutive-deficit pattern (~8 points to financial score).

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