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
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Steady State ↑
Overall
40
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
40
Score
Program
45
Score
Title
-
Institutions
-
Avg Revenue
-
Risk Profile
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
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 | Hidden | Hidden | 25.6% | 40 | Governance-Stressed | Recovery | |
| 2022 | — | — | 31.9% | 34 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2021 | — | — | 25.6% | 26 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2020 | — | — | 41.1% | 26 | Critical Intervention Needed | Gov Risk | |
| 2019 | — | — | 29.5% | 30 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2018 | — | — | 28.1% | 28 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2017 | — | — | 27.4% | 36 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2016 | — | — | 23.8% | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2015 | — | — | 24.1% | 31 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2014 | — | — | 27.4% | 22 | Critical Intervention Needed | Gov Risk | |
| 2013 | — | — | 25.3% | 26 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2012 | — | — | 23.8% | 31 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2025
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MEG LEBOW | Executive Director | 12.8% of Rev | ||
| SOPHIE CAMERON | Executive Director | 12.8% of Rev | ||
| JODI KANTER | Board Member | — | ||
| TRACEY BOWEN | Board Member | — | ||
| VANESSA BECKMAN | Board Member | — | ||
| BARBARA NWACHUKWU | Board Member | — | ||
| EMILY MEROLLI | Board Member | — | ||
| CHRISTINE DUNATHAN | Board Member | — | ||
| MICHAEL NOVELLO | Board President | — | ||
| JANICE SHAW | Board President | — | ||
| JORDAN HARRIS | Secretary | — | ||
| CLARE LEFEBURE | Treasurer | — |
Tax year 2023
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MEG LEBOW | Executive Director | 5.9% of Rev | ||
| SOPHIE CAMERON | Executive Director | 5.9% of Rev | ||
| JODI KANTER | Board Member | — | ||
| JORDAN HARRIS | Board Member | — | ||
| JANICE SHAW | Board Member | — | ||
| MICHAEL NOVELLO | Board President | — | ||
| TRACEY BRODERICK | Board President | — | ||
| JENNIE GUILFOYLE | Secretary | — | ||
| CLARE LEFEBURE | Treasurer | — |
Tax year 2021
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| DAVID MINTON | Artistic Director | 18.2% of Rev | ||
| DAVID MINTON | Artistic Director | 15.2% of Rev | ||
| JULIE REINER | Board Member | 11.2% of Rev | ||
| JULIE REINER | Board Member | 9.9% of Rev | ||
| JENNIE GUILFOYLE | Board Member | — | ||
| COLETTE MATZZIE | Board Member | — | ||
| MICHAEL NOVELLO | Board Member | — | ||
| ALBEE SHANEFELTER | Board Member | — | ||
| ESTHER SCHWARTZ-MCKINZIE | Board Member | — | ||
| AMANDA ADOLPH-FORE | Board President | — | ||
| CINDY ROSS-ZENICK | Secretary | — | ||
| DARA CORRIGAN | Treasurer | — | ||
| MEG LEBOW | Executive Director | — | ||
| SOPHIE CAMERON | Executive Director | — | ||
| LAURA MARTIN | Board Member | — | ||
| COLETTE MATZZIE | Board Member | — | ||
| MICHAEL NOVELLO | Board Member | — | ||
| ALBEE SHANEFELTER | Board Member | — | ||
| ESTHER SCHWARTZ | Board Member | — | ||
| AMANDA ADOLPH-FORE | Board President | — | ||
| CINDY ROSS-ZENICK | Secretary | — | ||
| DARA CORRIGAN | Treasurer | — |
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
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
40 / 100
Priority Review
The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →
Peer comparison
Compared to 75 other orgs in MD with NTEE prefix A6.
Most-divergent component: program score sits 18 points above the peer median (45 vs. 27).
5-year trend: Steady State
No extreme longitudinal divergence detected. The organization is maintaining its current operational philosophy.
What's driving this score
- Comp-to-revenue ratio of 25.6% is modestly above the sector's healthy band (18–22%) — worth monitoring.
- Two consecutive years of deficit spending.
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).
- 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.