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
61
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
100
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
2012
2013
2014
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
2024 Hidden Hidden — 61 Stable Stable Watch
2023 — — — 61 Stable Stable Watch
2022 — — — 64 Stable Stable Watch
2021 — — — 60 Stable Stable Watch
2020 — — — 53 Fragile Decline Risk
2019 — — — 61 Stable Stable Watch
2018 — — — 61 Stable Stable Watch
2017 — — — 59 Fragile Recovery
2012 — — — 49 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
KATYA CHAN Treasurer —
HOLLY FISCHER Board Member —
DIANE MEZA Board Member —
ASH MINER Board Member —
ERIKO TSUJI ACADEMY DIRECTO —
JENNIFER VISICK Board President —
JOHN YORK Secretary —
JOSEPH KAYE Board Member —
GENE WIE Board Member —
APRIL CHOCOLATY Board Member —
CHRISTINE JELBERT Executive Dir. —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JENNIFER VISICK Board President —
RIE OKIMURA MANAGER —
ANN WU Treasurer —
GENE WIE ADVISOR —
APRIL CHOCOLATY Board Member —
CHRISTINE JELBERT Executive Dir. —
KATYA CHAN Secretary —
HOLLY FISCHER Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
100 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
61 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 1,425 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 47 points above the peer median (100 vs. 53).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 53 → 61 over 5 years (improving by 8 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.