Acute Stabilization
Acute Stabilization
Acute Stabilization Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Acute Stabilization

What does this mean?

A successful crisis intervention. After hitting the Priority Review risk tier, the organization demonstrates consecutive years of Financial Score recovery paired with Governance Score improvement.

The Path Forward

The Dawn

Institutionalizes the emergency protocols that saved the organization. It locks in new, rigorous governance policies to prevent a relapse into crisis.

The Dawn
The Dawn
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Acute Stabilization ↑
Overall
38
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
15
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Acute Stabilization

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2023 Hidden Hidden 13.1% 38 Financially Distressed Recovery
2022 — — 17.8% 37 Financially Distressed Recovery
2021 — — 30.3% 24 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2020 — — 24.1% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2019 — — 18.3% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 — — — 38 Financially Distressed Recovery
2017 — — 19.3% 37 Financially Distressed Recovery
2016 — — 22.0% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 — — 21.7% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 — — 12.0% 38 Financially Distressed Recovery
2013 — — 21.0% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2012 — — 20.2% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2011 — — 22.5% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
LAWRENCE ROSENBERG Board Member 6.9% of Rev
LAWRENCE ROSENBERG Board Member 6.9% of Rev
SARMA Lapenieks ROSENBERG Board Member 6.1% of Rev
SARMA Lapenieks ROSENBERG Board Member 6.1% of Rev
ROSALINDA MONROY Board President —
DOUG MCKAY Board Member —
Vivan Gottheiner Treasurer —
DALE MERRILL Board Member —
Raina Tsuda Board Member —
STEVE WELLS Board Member —
Jacque Lollie Walker Board President —
Rayell Segerstrom Board Member —
Natalie Imkamp Board Member —
ROSALINDA MONROY Board President —
DOUG MCKAY Board Member —
Vivan Gottheiner Treasurer —
DALE MERRILL Board Member —
STEVE WELLS Board Member —
Jacque Lollie Walker Board President —
Rayell Segerstrom Board Member —
Natalie Imkamp Board Member —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
LAWRENCE ROSENBERG Board Member 7.8% of Rev
SARMA Lapenieks ROSENBERG Board Member 6.9% of Rev
ROSALINDA MONROY Board President —
DOUG MCKAY Board Member —
Vivan Gottheiner Treasurer —
DALE MERRILL Board Member —
Raina Tsuda Board Member —
STEVE WELLS Board Member —
Jacque Lollie Walker Board President —
Rayell Segerstrom Board Member —
Natalie Imkamp Board Member —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
LAWRENCE ROSENBERG Board Member 8.4% of Rev
SARMA Lapenieks ROSENBERG Board Member 7.4% of Rev
ROSALINDA MONROY Board President —
DOUG MCKAY Board Member —
Vivan Gottheiner Treasurer —
DALE MERRILL Board Member —
STEVE WELLS Board Member —
Jacque Lollie Walker Board President —
Rayell Segerstrom Board Member —
Natalie Imkamp Board Member —

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
LAWRENCE ROSENBERG Board Member 6.6% of Rev
SARMA ROSENBERG Board Member 6.2% of Rev
ROSALINDA MONROY Board President —
DOUG MCKAY Board Member —
Vivan Gottheiner Treasurer —
DALE MERRILL Board Member —
STEVE WELLS Board Member —
Jacque Lollie Walker Board President —
Rayell Segerstrom Board Member —
Natalie Imkamp Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
15 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
38 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 1,424 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 38 points below the peer median (15 vs. 53).

5-year trend: Acute Stabilization

A successful crisis intervention. After hitting the Priority Review risk tier, the organization demonstrates consecutive years of Financial Score recovery paired with Governance Score improvement.

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).
  2. 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.