Mission Drift
Mission Drift
Mission Drift Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
Trajectory Thumbprint

Mission Drift

What does this mean?

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

The Path Forward

The Lodestar

A radical recommitment to the core mission. It requires the organization to gain the strength to say 'no' to restricted funding that pulls them away from their true purpose.

The Lodestar
The Lodestar
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Mission Drift
Overall
50
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
40
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Mission Drift

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 6.4% 50 Fragile Recovery
2022 10.9% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 17.6% 49 Fragile Recovery
2020 7.0% 38 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2019 9.0% 44 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 8.2% 44 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 1.3% 45 Fragile Recovery
2016 36 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2015 9.7% 42 Fragile Recovery
2014 9.9% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 7.1% 44 Fragile Recovery
2012 9.7% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DAVID BANDER Executive Director 6.0% of Rev
PAUL BINDLER Board Member
MARK ETTENGER Board President
HEIDI HELFST Board President
KAREN ISAAC Board Member
RUSS JELLINEK Board Member
BARBARA LEWIS KAPLAN Board Member
MICHAEL P MCSHERRY Secretary
ROBERT NATHAN Board Member
MARTIN J OPPENHEIMER Board Member
ANDREA POTASH Board Member
FRANK SORIANO Board Member
ROBERT WIENER Board Member
MARGARET KOHLER Board Member
RICK ROTH Board Member

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DAVID BANDER Executive Director
PAUL BINDLER Board Member
MARK ETTENGER Board President
HEIDI HELFST Board President
KAREN ISAAC Board Member
RUSS JELLINEK Board Member
BARBARA LEWIS KAPLAN Board Member
MICHAEL P MCSHERRY Treasurer
ROBERT NATHAN Board Member
MARTIN J OPPENHEIMER Board Member
ANDREA POTASH Board Member
FRANK SORIANO Board Member
ROBERT WIENER Board Member
RICK ROTH Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ELLIOT FOX Executive Director 2.8% of Rev
TERRENCE DWYER Board Member 1.2% of Rev
PAUL BINDLER Board Member
MARK ETTENGER Board President
HEIDI HELFST Board President
KAREN ISAAC Board Member
RUSS JELLINEK Board Member
BARBARA LEWIS KAPLAN Board Member
MICHAEL P MCSHERRY Treasurer
GIB NATHAN Board Member
MARTIN J OPPENHEIMER Board Member
ANDREA POTASH Board Member
FRANK SORIANO Board Member
ROBERT WIENER Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ELLIOT FOX Executive Director 4.5% of Rev
PAUL BINDLER Board Member
MARK ETTENGER Board President
EMILY GRANT Secretary
HEIDI HELFST Board President
KAREN ISAAC Board Member
RUSS JELLINEK Board Member
BARBARA LEWIS KAPLAN Board President
MICHAEL P MCSHERRY Board Member
MARTIN J OPPENHEIMER Board Member
ROBERT NATHAN Treasurer
ANDREA POTASH Board Member
FRANK SORIANO Board Member
ROBERT WIENER Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ELLIOT FOX Executive Director 6.5% of Rev
PAUL BINDLER Board Member
MARK ETTENGER Board President
ARTHUR S GORDON Board Member
EMILY GRANT Secretary
HEIDI HELFST Board President
KAREN ISAAC Board Member
RUSS JELLINEK Board Member
BARBARA LEWIS KAPLAN Board President
MICHAEL P MCSHERRY Board Member
MARTIN J OPPENHEIMER Board Member
ROBERT NATHAN Treasurer
ANDREA POTASH Board Member
FRANK SORIANO Board Member
KERRY STEIN Board Member
ROBERT WIENER Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
40 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
50 / 100
Developing

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 699 other orgs in NY with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 31 points above the peer median (60 vs. 29).

5-year trend: Mission Drift

Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.