Programmatic Contraction
What does this mean?
Total revenue is stable, but the percentage of expenses spent on actual mission shrinks. Indicates administrative bloat and spending on the machinery of raising money rather than the art itself.
The Path Forward
The Rainmaker
Represents the forced release of hoarded resources back into the community. It acts as a pressure valve against administrative capture, ensuring the mission takes priority over the machine.
Title
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | — | — | — | 47 | Financially Distressed | Stable Watch | |
| 2018 | — | — | — | 47 | Financially Distressed | Recovery | |
| 2017 | — | — | — | 35 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2016 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch | |
| 2015 | — | — | — | 29 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2014 | — | — | — | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2013 | — | — | — | 37 | Fragile | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
No IRS 990 Part VII compensation data available for this organization.
Score breakdown
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 24 points above the peer median (55 vs. 31).
5-year trend: Programmatic Contraction
Total revenue is stable, but the percentage of expenses spent on actual mission shrinks. Indicates administrative bloat and spending on the machinery of raising money rather than the art itself.
Overall score has gone from 29 → 47 over 5 years (improving by 18 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.
What's driving this score
- All-volunteer org with no paid officers — governance signal is neutral (default 50), not absent.
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.