Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
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
46
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
45
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden 46 Fragile Recovery
2023 Hidden Hidden 41 Fragile Recovery
2022 35 Fragile Decline Risk
2021 41 Fragile Recovery
2020 32 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2019 40 Fragile Recovery
2018 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2017 39 Fragile Recovery
2016 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
GERALDINE DONATO Treasurer
JOHN ARNOTT Board President
KATHERINE FELLER Secretary
WENQU SHAO Board Member
VIK SHARMA Board Member
KAREN MAN Board Member
DIANE DAEVU Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Geraldine Donato Treasurer
Gregory Zinkl Board President
Sarah Locher Secretary
John Arnott Board Member
Kate Cowan Board President

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Geraldine Donato Treasurer
Gregory Zinkl Board President
Sarah Locher Secretary
John Arnott Board Member
Kate Cowan Board President
Nathan Park Board Member
Lance Jesserun Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
45 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
46 / 100
Stable

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: financial score sits 12 points above the peer median (45 vs. 33).

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. 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.