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
50
Score
Financial
5
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 34 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2023 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2022 38 Financially Distressed Recovery
2021 37 Fragile Decline Risk
2020 44 Fragile Recovery
2019 49 Fragile Recovery
2018 41 Fragile Recovery
2017 25 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2016 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 33 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 39 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 39 Fragile Recovery
2012 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JENNY KAZAK Board President
LINDSAY HENRIOD Board President
JIMMY KANG Treasurer
SUSAN HARLAN Treasurer
SANTHI KUMAR Treasurer
ALISON PARRA Secretary
JEEWON KANG Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MELISSA MAZIN Board President
STEPHANIE FOSSAN Board President
JEANNIE CHANG Treasurer
JEFFREY BROOKEY Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
LESLIE LOWES Board President
MICHELLE MORGAN Secretary
JAMIE MACKENZIE Board President
ANITA ASLANIAN Treasurer
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
5 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 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 46 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A1.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 37 points below the peer median (5 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.