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
34
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2020 9.6% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2019 8.0% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2016 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JOHN RAFTERY Board Member 11.1% of Rev
DAVID NORONA VICE PRESIDE 9.7% of Rev
CHARLIE HARPER Secretary 9.6% of Rev
DANN FARRELLY Board Member 9.0% of Rev
FABIANO ALTAMURA Board President 5.1% of Rev
ANDREW MASON Treasurer 1.3% of Rev
JULIE DYER Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DAVID NORONA VICE PRESIDE 10.1% of Rev
CHARLIE HARPER Secretary 9.2% of Rev
JULIE DYER Board Member 5.3% of Rev
DANN FARELLY Board Member 5.3% of Rev
JOHN RAFTERY Board Member 5.3% of Rev
FABIANO ALTAMURA Board President 4.4% of Rev
ANDREW MASON Treasurer 1.5% of Rev
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
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
34 / 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 26 → 34 over 4 years (improving by 8 points).

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.