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
26
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
20
Score
Program
0
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2019 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 26 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2017 26 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2016 36.8% 46 Fragile Gov Risk
2015 52 Fragile Recovery
2014 52 Fragile Recovery
2013 48 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 48 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 48 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DAVID AUBERBACH VICE-PRESIDE
ROBERT BERZOK Secretary
BRUCE BIRENBOIM VICE PRESIDE
RUTH BLODGETT Board President
WENDE CARVER Board Member
BARBARA COHEN-HOBBS Board Member
DAVID COMALLI VICE PRESIDE
KATHLEEN FABRIZIO Board Member
MARIE FEDER Board Member
DAVID LLOYD JR Vice President
SCOTT KIRCHNER Board Member
KATE MAGUIRE Artistic Director
ANDREW MICK Board Member
LEE PERLMAN Vice President
IAN RASCH Board Member
LORI A ROBBINS Board Member
CASY MEADE ROTHSTEIN-FITZPATRICK Board Member
JAMES RUBERTO HONORARY CHA
LINDA RUBERTO VICE PRESIDE
MARY CAROL RUDIN Board Member
ALLI SHEEHAN VICE PRESIDE
KENNETH STARK Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
20 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
0 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
26 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 246 other orgs in MA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 29 points below the peer median (0 vs. 29).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 52 → 26 over 5 years (declining by 26 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.