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
55
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
90
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

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
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 55 Fragile Recovery
2022 54 Fragile Recovery
2020 51 Fragile Recovery
2019 39 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2018 51 Fragile Recovery
2017 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 53 Fragile Recovery
2015 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2014 55 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Bernard Linden Board President
Kim Athans Secretary
Emily Germann Treasurer
Bernard Linden Board President
Kim Athans Secretary
Emily Germann Treasurer

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Francis Acosta Board President
Kim Athans Secretary
Emily Germann Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Inga Vintimilla Board President
Francis Lopez Secretary
Christina Young Treasurer

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Brian Hedges Board President
Inga Vintimilla Secretary
Amber Santos Treasurer
Tricia Bailey Fundraising Events
Jennifer Hedges Ticketing
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
90 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
55 / 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 57 points above the peer median (90 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.