Governance Lag
Governance Lag
Governance Lag Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
Trajectory Thumbprint

Governance Lag

What does this mean?

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

The Path Forward

The Scaffold

Brings immediate structural maturity. It represents the necessity of outside, independent oversight to manage new scale, breaking the echo chamber of a founding 'friends and family' board.

The Scaffold
The Scaffold
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Governance Lag
Overall
52
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Governance Lag

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden 52 Fragile Recovery
2023 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 26 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 32 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2020 36 Financially Distressed Recovery
2019 45 Fragile Recovery
2018 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 41 Fragile Recovery
2016 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 47 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DANIEL M CLELAND Board Member
CHRIS GERO Board President
PAUL PREDMORE Secretary

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DANIEL M CLELAND Board Member
CHRIS GERO Board President
CHRISTINE WOODCOCK DETTOR Treasurer
GLENN STEELE Board President

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DANIEL M CLELAND Board Member
CHRIS GERO Board President
CHRISTINE WOODCOCK DETTOR Treasurer
GLENN STEELE Board President

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DANIEL M CLELAND Board Member
CHRIS GERO Board President
CHRISTINE WOODCOCK DETTOR Treasurer
GLENN STEELE Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
50 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
52 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 34 other orgs in NY with NTEE prefix A1.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 15 points above the peer median (50 vs. 35).

5-year trend: Governance Lag

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Stabilize program expenses or grow earned-income revenue to break the consecutive-deficit pattern (~8 points to financial score).

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