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
35
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
30
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 8.4% 35 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2023 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 17.9% 28 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2020 36 Fragile Recovery
2016 37 Financially Distressed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Kendra Heisler Board Member 8.4% of Rev
Michael Wigotsky Board President
Steven Lefkowitz Board Member
Felicia Herman Treasurer
Len Heisler Officer
Aaron Harnick Officer
Hyeku Song Board Member
Brett Moskowitz Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Kendra Heisler Board Member 9.4% of Rev
Michael Wigotsky Board President
Steven Lefkowitz Board Member
Felicia Herman Treasurer
Len Heisler Officer
Aaron Harnick Officer
Hyeku Song Board Member
Elizabeth Scheel Board President

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Michael Wigotsky Board President
William Rubenstein Secretary
Felicia Herman Treasurer
Len Heisler Officer
Aaron Harnick Officer
Kendra Heisler Board Member
Elizabeth Scheel Officer
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
30 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
35 / 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 5 points above the peer median (55 vs. 50).

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).
  2. 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.