Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
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
51
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
65
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
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 51 Fragile Recovery
2022 48 Fragile Recovery
2021 37 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2020 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2019 55 Fragile Recovery
2018 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 51 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2015 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 55 Fragile Recovery
2013 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2012 55 Fragile Recovery
2011 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2010 49 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Donald Swartz Board President
Lawrence D Swartz Jr Treasurer
Kathy Ellis Donner Board Member
Julie Senko Secretary
Jesse Swartz Board Member
Joann Mis Board Member
Gary Cox Board Member
Carl Kwasniak Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Gary Cox Board Member
Carl Kwasniak Board Member
Joann Mis Board Member
Donald Swartz Board President
Julie Senko Secretary
Lawrence D Swartz Jr Treasurer
Kathy Ellis Donner Board Member
Jesse Swartz Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
65 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
51 / 100
Stable

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: financial score sits 34 points above the peer median (65 vs. 31).

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. Stabilize program expenses or grow earned-income revenue to break the consecutive-deficit pattern (~8 points to financial score).

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