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
43
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
45
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 — 43 Financially Distressed Recovery
2022 — — 49.4% 36 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 — — — 41 Fragile Stable Watch
2020 — — — 37 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
NANCY FIASCHETTI ADMINISTRATOR 22.3% of Rev
LESLY DE GROOT Artistic Director 20.3% of Rev
ERIC SCHAER Board President —
SCOTT GRILLO Treasurer —
CATHERINE YOUNG Secretary —
COLLEEN HAWKS-PIERCE Board Member —
CHRISTIAN GAUL Board Member —
YAJAIRA HERNANDEZ Board Member —
CESARIO TIRADO-ORTIZ Board Member —
NINA GERSHONOWITZ Board Member —
OMAR CAMPS-KAMRIN Board Member —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
COLLEEN HAWKS-PIERCE Artistic Director 19.4% of Rev
NANCY FIASCHETTI ADMINISTRATOR 18.6% of Rev
LESLY DE GROOT Artistic Director 7.4% of Rev
JOSEPH BURBY Board Member —
OMAR KAMPS-KAMRIN Board Member —
NINA GERSHONOWITZ BOARD MEMEBER —
MARY BETH MAHER Secretary —
ERIC SCHAER Board President —
SCOTT GRILLO Treasurer —
CHRISTIAN GAUL Board Member —
ENID GRAHAM Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
45 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
43 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 1,226 other orgs in NY with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: governance score sits 15 points below the peer median (50 vs. 65).

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.