Governance Lag
What does this mean?
Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.
The Path Forward
The Scaffold
Brings immediate structural maturity. It represents the necessity of outside, independent oversight to manage new scale, breaking the echo chamber of a founding 'friends and family' board.
Title
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | — | — | — | 44 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2019 | — | — | — | 37 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2018 | — | — | — | 27 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch | |
| 2017 | — | — | — | 27 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2022
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stan Lambourne | Board Member | — | ||
| Carey Berend | Board Member | — | ||
| Barry Mast | Board Member | — | ||
| Tim Parker | Board Member | — | ||
| Shellie McMenamy | Board Member | — | ||
| Shelley Mast | Board Member | — | ||
| June Sinner | Secretary | — | ||
| Lee Jensen | Board President | — | ||
| Nancy Boudakian | Board President | — | ||
| MaryLee Levy | Treasurer | — | ||
| Craig Erker | Board Member | — | ||
| Bill McKee | Board Member | — | ||
| Krista Harris | Board Member | — |
Score breakdown
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: Governance Lag
Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.
Overall score has gone from 27 → 44 over 4 years (improving by 17 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.
What's driving this score
- All-volunteer org with no paid officers — governance signal is neutral (default 50), not absent.
- Two consecutive years of deficit spending.
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- 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.