Mission Drift
What does this mean?
Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.
The Path Forward
The Lodestar
A radical recommitment to the core mission. It requires the organization to gain the strength to say 'no' to restricted funding that pulls them away from their true purpose.
Title
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | — | — | — | 61 | Stable | Stable Watch | |
| 2021 | — | — | — | 37 | Fragile | Decline Risk | |
| 2020 | — | — | — | 54 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2018 | — | — | — | 37 | Financially Distressed | Stable Watch | |
| 2016 | — | — | — | 37 | Financially Distressed | Stable Watch | |
| 2015 | — | — | — | 37 | Financially Distressed | Stable Watch | |
| 2014 | — | — | — | 35 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch | |
| 2013 | — | — | — | 37 | Financially Distressed | Stable Watch | |
| 2012 | — | — | — | 37 | Financially Distressed | Recovery | |
| 2011 | — | — | — | 33 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
Tax year 2021
| Name | Title | Phone | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NICOLE TRIFACANA | Treasurer | — | ||
| LISA ROSER | Board President | — | ||
| BRIANA MORIARITY | VICE PRESIDE | — | ||
| CLAUDETTE ABOUNADER | Secretary | — | ||
| NICOLE TRIFACANA | Treasurer | — | ||
| LISA ROSER | Board President | — | ||
| BRIANNA MORIARITY | VICE PRESIDE | — | ||
| CLAUDETTE ABOUNADER | Secretary | — |
Score breakdown
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: financial score sits 69 points above the peer median (100 vs. 31).
5-year trend: Mission Drift
Highly volatile revenue swings year over year paired with fluctuating Program Scores. The organization is constantly pivoting to chase restricted grant funding rather than building a sustainable core.
Overall score has gone from 37 → 61 over 5 years (improving by 24 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.
What's driving this score
- All-volunteer org with no paid officers — governance signal is neutral (default 50), not absent.
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.