Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
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
32
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
20
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
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
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2023 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 51 Fragile Decline Risk
2021 58 Fragile Recovery
2020 54 Fragile Recovery
2019 41 Financially Distressed Recovery
2018 35 Financially Distressed Recovery
2017 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 43 Fragile Recovery
2015 39 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2014 47 Fragile Recovery
2013 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2011 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
RANDY SMITH Board President
ED WIEGMAN Treasurer
ERNESTO PEREZ Board President
CASONDARA BANKSON Secretary
ASHLEE MARTIN Chairman
JILL SMITH Chairman

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Joy Epstein Board President
Angelica Jimmenez Treasurer
Sara Richardson Board President
Kami Chan Secretary

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Joy Epstein Board President
Angelica Jimmenez Treasurer
Sara Richardson Board President
Kami Chan Secretary
Jennifer Blok Chairman
Jill Smith Chairman
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
20 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
32 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 16 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix B1.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 18 points below the peer median (15 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. Build cash reserves to at least 3 months of operating expenses — moves financial resilience score meaningfully (~10 points).

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