Steady State
Steady State
Steady State Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
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
57
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
75
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 5.9% 57 Fragile Recovery
2023 — — — 57 Fragile Recovery
2022 — — — 46 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
STEPHEN PIAZZA Artistic Director 5.9% of Rev
MICHAEL ANTIN Board Member —
ELLEN KANE Treasurer —
MARVIN LIEBMAN Board President —
JACKIE OLESKER Board President —
DEBORAH MACMURRAY Secretary —
JULIE NEWMAN Board Member —
SY SILVERBERG Board President —
MIHRAN KALAYDJIAN Board Member —
JUDY TRESTER Board Member —
JUDY ROSEN Board President —
JOHN O'REILLY Board Member —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MICHAEL ANTIN Board Member —
ELLEN KANE Treasurer —
MARVIN LIEBMAN Board President —
JACKIE OLESKER Board President —
DEBORAH MACMURRAY Secretary —
JULIE NEWMAN Board Member —
SY SILVERBERG Vice President —
EBONY TOLAND Legal Advisor —
STEPHEN PIAZZA Artistic Director —
JUDY TRESTER Board Member —
DAVE WESTON Board Member —
JUDY ROSEN Board President —
STEVE WOLOSHIN Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
75 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
57 / 100
Developing

The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →

Peer comparison

Compared to 1,424 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 22 points above the peer median (75 vs. 53).

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

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

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