Acute Resource Divergence
Acute Resource Divergence
Acute Resource Divergence Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Acute Resource Divergence

What does this mean?

Revenue is contracting significantly, but executive compensation percentage is rising. The organization is refusing to adjust its administrative overhead to match its new economic reality.

The Path Forward

The Realignment

Forces immediate balancing of administrative bloat against actual programmatic output. It demands that every dollar extracted for overhead be justified by community impact.

The Realignment
The Realignment
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Acute Resource Divergence
Overall
40
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
25
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
Resource Divergence

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 44.1% 40 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2022 23.8% 41 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2021 13.3% 52 Fragile Recovery
2020 21.4% 43 Fragile Recovery
2019 26.6% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2018 12.9% 44 Fragile Recovery
2017 17.6% 35 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 8.9% 50 Fragile Recovery
2015 21.9% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 18.7% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 22.4% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2012 30.5% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2011 33.6% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
STEPHEN PETRONIO Artistic Director 19.4% of Rev
JILL BRIENZA Board President
ALISON MAZZOLA Board Member
GARY HOLDER AND TODD WHITLEY Board Member
JEAN-MARC FLACK Board Member
JOA BALDINGER Board Member
KEN TABACHNICK Secretary
SHEILA HOLLENDER Board Member
MALIN YHR Treasurer
SARAH SILVER Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
STEPHEN PETRONIO Artistic Director 21.8% of Rev
JONAS KLABIN Executive Director 13.9% of Rev
MARCUS MCGREGOR Board Member 1.8% of Rev
JILL BRIENZA Board President
CLAIRE P FLACK Treasurer
SARAH SILVER Secretary
JOA BALDINGER Board Member
JEAN-MARC FLACK Board Member
GARY HOLDER Board Member
SHEILA HOLLENDER Board Member
ALISON MAZZOLA Board Member
KEN TABACHNICK Board Member
TODD WHITLEY Board Member
MALIN YHR Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
STEPHEN PETRONIO Artistic Director 21.8% of Rev
JONAS KLABIN Executive Director 15.2% of Rev
MARCUS MCGREGOR Board Member 3.6% of Rev
JILL BRIENZA Board President
CLAIRE P FLACK Treasurer
SARAH SILVER Secretary
JOA BALDINGER Board Member
JEAN-MARC FLACK Board Member
GARY HOLDER Board Member
ALISON MAZZOLA Board Member
KEN TABACHNICK Board Member
TODD WHITLEY Board Member
MALIN YHR Board Member
SHEILA HOLLENDER Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
STEPHEN PETRONIO Artistic Director 19.3% of Rev
JONAS KLABIN Executive Director 13.0% of Rev
YVAN GREENBERG Executive Director 8.5% of Rev
MARCUS MCGREGOR Board Member 6.0% of Rev
JILL BRIENZA Board President
CLAIRE P FLACK Treasurer
SARAH SILVER Secretary
JOA BALDINGER Board Member
JEAN-MARC FLACK Board Member
ALISON MAZZOLA Board Member
MALIN YHR Board Member
SHEILA HOLLENDER Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
25 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 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 700 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: Acute Resource Divergence

Revenue is contracting significantly, but executive compensation percentage is rising. The organization is refusing to adjust its administrative overhead to match its new economic reality.

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 44.1% 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.