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
30
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
5
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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
2025 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2024 — — — 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2023 — — — 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2022 — — — 42 Financially Distressed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DIANA FARRELL Board President —
ROBERT GRAULICH Board Member —
SCOTLAND KING Board Member —
MICHAEL OHALLORAN Board President —
CINDY DRENNAN Treasurer —
MAGGIE THOMPSON Secretary —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DIANA FARRELL Board President 3.0% of Rev
MICHAEL OHALLORAN Board Member 0.5% of Rev
MAGGIE THOMPSON Secretary —
WALTER YENKOSKY Board Member —
MINDILYN CHAPANIAN Board Member —
JOANNE DEBLIS Treasurer —
ROBERT GRAULICH Board President —
DAVID HEADLAND Board Member —
SCOTLAND KING Board Member —
MAGGIE THOMPSON Secretary —
WALTER YENKOSKY Board Member —
ASHLEY CHANEY Board Member —
AXEL M JUAREZ Board Member —
MINDILYN CHAPANIAN Board Member —
DIANA FARRELL Board President —
ROBERT GRAULICH Board President —
DAVID HEADLAND Board Member —
SCOTLAND KING Board Member —
MICHAEL OHALLORAN Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
5 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
30 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 1,424 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 48 points below the peer median (5 vs. 53).

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.