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
36
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
10
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
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 36 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2022 41 Financially Distressed Recovery
2021 38 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2020 1.4% 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2019 8.9% 54 Fragile Recovery
2018 38 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2017 38 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2016 42 Fragile Stable Watch
2015 42 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 42 Fragile Recovery
2013 38 Financially Distressed Recovery
2012 22.3% 47 Fragile Gov Risk
2011 13.8% 52 Fragile Recovery
2010 28.1% 50 Governance-Stressed Gov Risk

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JEANNE REZAI Executive Director 8.5% of Rev
OLIVIA TOURNAY FLATTO CHAIRMAN
SERENA LESE VICE CHAIRMAN
HAL J WITT Treasurer

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
OLIVIA TOURNAY FLATTO CHAIRMAN
SERENA LESE VICE CHAIRMAN
HAL J WITT Treasurer

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
MELITE DE FOUCAUD Executive Director 1.0% of Rev
OLIVIA TOURNAY FLATTO Board President
SERENA LESE VICE CHAIRMAN
HAL J WITT Treasurer
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
10 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
36 / 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: program score sits 31 points above the peer median (60 vs. 29).

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).

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