Governance Lag
Governance Lag
Governance Lag Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Governance Lag

What does this mean?

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

The Path Forward

The Scaffold

Brings immediate structural maturity. It represents the necessity of outside, independent oversight to manage new scale, breaking the echo chamber of a founding 'friends and family' board.

The Scaffold
The Scaffold
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Governance Lag
Overall
29
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
25
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 34.9% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 35.6% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 71.2% 13 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2020 38.6% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2019 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2017 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2016 24.6% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 37 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2014 47 Fragile Recovery
2013 37 Fragile Recovery
2012 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2011 23 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
David Recca Artistic Director 20.5% of Rev
Susan Landis Operations Associate 7.8% of Rev
Andrea Lodge Rehearsal Accompianist 6.1% of Rev
Aizhan Soltanova Conducting Fellow 3.7% of Rev
Sara Yood Board President
Emma Dickson Board President
Nora Thomson Secretary
Charles Mills Treasurer
Lewis Teel Board Member
Julie Heller Board Member
Kieran Walters Board President
Juan Jose Marzal Fernandez Associate Conductor

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
David Recca Artistic Director 20.5% of Rev
Susan Landis Operations Associate 7.7% of Rev
Andrea Lodge Rehearsal Accompianist 6.8% of Rev
Sara Yood Board President
Lewis Teel Board President
Nora Thomson Secretary
Charles Mills Board Member
Emma Dickson Board Member
Julie Heller Board President
Kieran Walters Board President
Juan Jose Marzal Fernandez Associate Conductor

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
David Recca Artistic Director 16.4% of Rev
Susan Landis Operations Associate 7.6% of Rev
Andrea Lodge Rehearsal Accompianist 6.3% of Rev
Juan Jose Marzal Fernandez Associate Conductor 4.3% of Rev
Sara Yood Board President
Lewis Teel Board President
Nora Thomson Secretary
Charles Mills Board Member
Emma Dickson Board Member
Julie Heller Board President
Kieran Walters Board President

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
David Recca Artistic Director 16.4% of Rev
Susan Landis Operations Associate 4.3% of Rev
Andrea Lodge Rehearsal Accompianist 3.2% of Rev
Laura Barger Rehearsal Pianist 2.7% of Rev
Sara Yood Board President
Lewis Teel Board President
Nora Thomson Secretary
Charles Mills Board Member
Emma Dickson Board Member
Craig Chu Board President
Julie Heller Board President

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Dustin Francis Artistic Director 16.4% of Rev
Laura Barger Rehearsal Accompianist 5.9% of Rev
Lewis Teel Board President
Sara Yood Board President
James Longo Secretary
Charles Mills Board Member
Nora Thomson Board Member
Craig Chu Board President
Laura King Board Member
Julie Heller Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
25 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
29 / 100
Priority Review

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: governance score sits 8 points below the peer median (42 vs. 50).

5-year trend: Governance Lag

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Reduce top-officer compensation from 34.9% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~26 points.
  2. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).

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