Compensation Escalation Cycle
Compensation Escalation Cycle
Compensation Escalation Cycle Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
Trajectory Thumbprint

Compensation Escalation Cycle

What does this mean?

Revenue grows modestly, but top officer compensation grows consistently for 5 years, breaching danger zones. The executive is negotiating aggressive raises against a compliant board.

The Path Forward

The Steward

Re-establishes board supremacy over executive extraction. It freezes compensation and mandates that all future financial rewards be tied strictly to verifiable mission expansion.

The Steward
The Steward
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Compensation Escalation Cycle ↓
Overall
47
Score
Governance
45
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Compensation Escalation

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2024 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2023 — — 17.5% 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 — — — 44 Fragile Decline Risk
2021 — — — 40 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2020 — — — 64 Fragile Decline Risk
2019 — — 7.4% 50 Fragile Decline Risk
2018 — — 1.6% 48 Fragile Decline Risk
2017 — — — 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 — — — 35 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 — — 3.2% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 — — 12.4% 26 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 — — 11.2% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 — — 12.5% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2011 — — 9.0% 36 Financially Distressed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Bethers Annette Executive Dir. 13.7% of Rev
Ruan Kylie Departed 1223 Executive Dir. 12.8% of Rev
Bethers Annette Eff 324 Executive Dir. 4.7% of Rev
Thompson Debbie Treasurer 0.2% of Rev
Bosco Austina Board Member —
Geils Laurelle Board Member —
Gates Joanna Departed 224 Board President —
Thompson Debbie Treasurer —
Stein Leanne Secretary —
Valadez Frank Board President —
Amador Begona Board Member —
Aguirre Joe Eff 224 Board Member —
Michael Stein Eff 324 Board Member —
Bosco Austina Board Member —
Geils Laurelle eff 1124 Board Member —
Rivera Gilbert Eff 125 Board Member —
Stein Leanne Secretary —
Valadez Frank Board President —
Amador Begonia Board Member —
Aguirre Joe Board Member —
Stein Michael Board Member —
Gardner Cathy Eff 0724 Board Member —
Zagon Sophia Eff 125 Board Member —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Bosco Austina Board Member —
Geils Laurelle Board Member —
Ruan Kylie Executive Dir. —
Gates Joanna Board President —
Thompson Debbie Treasurer —
Stein Leanne Secretary —
Valadez Frank Board President —
Amador Begona Board Member —
Peshek Brian-Departed 922 Board Member —
Amador Begonia Board Member —
Bike Benita Board Member —
Bosco Austina Vice President —
Gates Joanna Board Member —
Guiles Laurelle Executive Dir. —
McKinney Ruth Board Member —
Peshek Brian Board Member —
Thompson Debbie Treasurer —
Stein Leanne Board Member —
Valdez Frank Board President —
Young Carolyn Board Member —
Zapp Jennifer Board Member —

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Bosco Austin Vice President —
Guiles Lorelle Executive Dir. —
Moore Carin Board Member —
Pesek Brian Board Member —
Thompson Debbie Treasurer —
Stein Leanne Board Member —
Valdez Frank Board President —
Bosco Austin Vice President —
Guiles Lorelle Executive Dir. —
Moore Carin Board Member —
Pesek Brian Board Member —
Thompson Debbie Treasurer —
Stein Leanne Board Member —
Valdez Frank Board President —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
50 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
45 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
47 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 1,023 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: governance score sits 34 points below the peer median (45 vs. 79).

5-year trend: Compensation Escalation Cycle

Revenue grows modestly, but top officer compensation grows consistently for 5 years, breaching danger zones. The executive is negotiating aggressive raises against a compliant board.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).
  2. 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.