Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
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
52
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

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

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2023 12.7% 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2022 12.3% 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 14.5% 52 Fragile Recovery
2020 16.6% 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2019 14.0% 52 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 12.6% 52 Fragile Recovery
2017 11.5% 48 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 9.9% 50 Fragile Decline Risk
2015 5.8% 54 Fragile Recovery
2014 13.7% 48 Fragile Recovery
2013 13.5% 38 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2012 14.0% 46 Fragile Recovery
2011 15.5% 47 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JIA YI GU Executive Dir. 7.7% of Rev
ANGELICA FUENTES Treasurer 5.0% of Rev
MEHRAN TASLIMI Board Member
LILLI HOLLEIN Board Member
MICHAEL KILROY Board Member
MARK MACK Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JIA YI GU Executive Dir. 7.7% of Rev
ANGELICA FUENTES Treasurer 4.8% of Rev
MEHRAN TASLIMI Board Member
LILLI HOLLEIN Board Member
MICHAEL KILORY Board Member
MARCK MACK Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PRISCILLA FRASER Executive Dir. 8.4% of Rev
ANGELICA FUENTES Treasurer 4.5% of Rev
DORIS KARNER Board Member
ANDREAS LAUNER Board Member
CHRISTOPH THUN-HOHENSTEIN Board Member
JIA YI GU Executive Dir.
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
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
52 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 171 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 30 points above the peer median (60 vs. 30).

5-year trend: Steady State

No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.

Overall score has gone from 52 → 52 over 5 years (stable by 0 points).

What's driving this score

What would change this score

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

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