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
14
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
2023 Hidden Hidden 14 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 42.0% 17 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 25 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2020 22.9% 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2019 18.4% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 27.3% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2017 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2016 25 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2015 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2013 45 Fragile Recovery
2012 27 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2011 23 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Roya Alt Executive Director 111,558.1% of Rev
Lynn Farrand Artistic Director 51,532.3% of Rev
Nancy Chappell Board President
Susan Kelly Secretary
Leonard Linton Treasurer
Richard Reitzell Board Member
Lawrence Janss Board Member
Joesph Bagliere Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Roya Alt Board Member 107,419.4% of Rev
Leoanrd Linton Treasurer
Nancy Chappel Board President
Susan Kelly Secretary
Gerhard Apfelthaler Board Member
Daniel Crosby Board Member
Lawrence Janss Board Member
Richard Reitzell 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
14 / 100
Priority Review

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 33 points below the peer median (0 vs. 33).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 29 → 14 over 5 years (declining by 15 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

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.