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
40
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
55
Score
Program
15
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 Hidden Hidden 52.0% 40 Governance-Stressed Gov Risk
2022 43 Fragile Recovery
2021 43 Fragile Stable Watch
2020 42 Fragile Recovery
2019 47 Fragile Recovery
2018 39 Fragile Recovery
2017 35 Fragile Decline Risk
2016 39 Fragile Decline Risk
2015 47 Fragile Recovery
2014 39 Fragile Decline Risk
2013 51 Fragile Recovery
2012 43 Fragile Recovery
2011 41 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
CHRISTINA DI STEFANO Executive Dir. 43.7% of Rev
ANDREW FITZSIMMONS Board Member 7.6% of Rev
T BENJAMIN HOBBS Board Member 0.8% of Rev
DARRYL LINDSAY Board Member
NADINE BIGSBY Board President
KATHEYE ARRINGTON Board Member
SUZANNE POE Board Member
JAMES WAHLS Board Member
TIM JACKSON Board President
MICHAEL POE Treasurer
MARY MACK Secretary

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Nadine Bigsby Board President
Christina Di Stefano Executive Director
Tim Jackson Board President
Brandon Smith Treasurer
Mary Mack Secretary
Darryl Lindsay Board Member
Joan Smith Board Member
James Wahls Board Member
T Benjamin Hobbs Board Member
Suzanne Poe Board Member
Gillian Smith Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
55 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 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 146 other orgs in NY with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 25 points above the peer median (55 vs. 30).

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. Reduce top-officer compensation from 52.0% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~40 points.
  2. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).

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