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
30
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
30
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Steady State

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2024 — — 38.2% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2023 — — — 37 Fragile Recovery
2022 — — 37.2% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 — — 36.8% 24 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
GILI MELAMED-LEV Artistic Director 38.2% of Rev
MATTHEW CAIN CHAIRMAN —
CRAIG BENDER Treasurer —
MARTINA DEIGNAN Secretary —
NICOLE FURNEE Board Member —
BARBARA LAX KRANZ Board Member —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
GILI MELAMED-LEV Artistic Director 26.2% of Rev
GILI MELAMED-LEV Artistic Director 15.1% of Rev
MATT CAIN CHAIRMAN —
CRAIG BENDER Treasurer —
MARTINA DEIGNAN Secretary —
BJ JOHNSON Board Member —
NICOLE FURNEE Board Member —
MATT CAIN CHAIRMAN —
CRAIG BENDER Treasurer —
MARTINA DEIGNAN Secretary —
WILLIAM JOHNSON Board Member —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
WILLIAM JOHNSON Board President —
CRAIG BENDER Treasurer —
GILI MELAMED-LEV Artistic Director —
MARTINA DEIGNAN Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
30 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
30 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 142 other orgs in NY with NTEE prefix A9.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 44 points below the peer median (30 vs. 74).

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 38.2% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~32 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.