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
19
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
5
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
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 19 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2022 32 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 32 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2020 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2019 36 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2018 40 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 40 Fragile Recovery
2016 36 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2015 40 Fragile Recovery
2014 36 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2013 38 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2012 45 Fragile Recovery
2011 5.8% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2010 1.5% 51 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MICHAEL MADDEN Board President
BOB HURLEY Secretary
TIMOTHY LACZYNSKI Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MICHAEL MADDEN Board President
BOB HURLEY Secretary
TIMOTHY LACZYNSKI Treasurer

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MICHAEL MADDEN Board President
BOB HURLEY Secretary
TIMOTHY LACZYNSKI Treasurer
BARBARA NEMKO Board Member
BANAFSHEH AKHLAGHI Board Member
JERI HANSEN Board Member
MAX DULEY Board Member
MIKE BERG Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
0 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
19 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 46 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A1.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 42 points below the peer median (0 vs. 42).

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.