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
19
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2021 19 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2020 24 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2019 1.4% 28 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 10.8% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2016 14.2% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 15.1% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2014 5.8% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2013 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2011 25 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MARK KELLY CHAIRMAN
EMILIE STUART Treasurer
ROBERT RAPHAEL JUST Board Member
CHARLES MCATEER Board Member
LILY MCATEER Board Member
EVE POMERANCE Board Member
HELEN TWISS Board Member
SABRA JONES Artistic Director

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
SABRA JONES Artistic Director 11.9% of Rev
HELEN TWISS CHAIRMAN
SARAH JANE EIGERMAN Treasurer
MARK KELLY Board Member
THOMAS MCATEER Board Member
MARILYN S MILLER Board Member
EMILIE STUART Board Member
EVE POMERANCE Board Member
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
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
19 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 700 other orgs in NY with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 31 points below the peer median (0 vs. 31).

5-year trend: Steady State

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

Overall score has gone from 31 → 19 over 5 years (declining by 12 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.