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
30
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
20
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
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 Hidden Hidden 30 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2023 45 Fragile Stable Watch
2022 48 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 48 Fragile Recovery
2020 37 Fragile Stable Watch
2019 37 Fragile Recovery
2018 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 45 Fragile Recovery
2016 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 35 Fragile Recovery
2014 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 43 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 41 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Marilyn Deighton Board President
Margaret Lacki Board President
Robert Galante Treasurer
Gaetana Galante Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Marilyn Deighton Board President
Margaret Lacki Board President
Robert Galante Treasurer
Gaetana Galante Treasurer
Adair Saviola Board President
Marilyn Deighton Board President
Russ Papia Board President
Patricia White Treasurer
Robert Galante Treasurer
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
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
30 / 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: program score sits 24 points below the peer median (5 vs. 29).

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.