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
50
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
65
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

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
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden 50 Fragile Recovery
2023 47 Fragile Recovery
2022 46 Fragile Recovery
2021 45 Fragile Recovery
2020 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2019 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 25 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2016 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Jennifer Steece Board President
Jessica Bystrom Treasurer
Jessica Ferrier Secretary

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Christina Wiitanen Board President
Kim Radford Vice President
Jessica Bystrom Treasurer
Susan Hsieh Board President
Veronica Llamas Secretary
Jinky Steinberg Vice President

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Mai Tran Board President
Ken Melancon Webmaster
Quyen Nguyen Treasurer
Susan Hsieh Board President
Anna Rounds Secretary
Jinky Steinburg Spirit Wear
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
65 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
50 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 830 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 32 points above the peer median (65 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.