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.
Title
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | — | — | — | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2022 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2021 | — | — | 83.0% | 26 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2020 | — | — | 85.3% | 30 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2019 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2018 | — | — | — | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch | |
| 2017 | — | — | — | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2016 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2015 | — | — | — | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2014 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2013 | — | — | — | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2012 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch | |
| 2011 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2023
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| William S Backer | Board President | 74.2% of Rev | ||
| Karen Backer | Secretary | 6.2% of Rev | ||
| David Donnelley | Treasurer | — | ||
| Howard Gillette | Board President | — |
Tax year 2022
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| William S Backer | Board President | 74.2% of Rev | ||
| Karen Backer | Secretary | 11.1% of Rev | ||
| David Donnelley | Treasurer | — | ||
| Howard Gillette | Board President | — |
Score breakdown
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 13 points below the peer median (20 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 → 33 over 5 years (improving by 4 points).
What's driving this score
- All-volunteer org with no paid officers — governance signal is neutral (default 50), not absent.
- Two consecutive years of deficit spending.
- Financial resilience score in the bottom quartile — reserves and liabilities ratios warrant review.
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- Build cash reserves to at least 3 months of operating expenses — moves financial resilience score meaningfully (~10 points).
- 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.