Programmatic Contraction
What does this mean?
Total revenue is stable, but the percentage of expenses spent on actual mission shrinks. Indicates administrative bloat and spending on the machinery of raising money rather than the art itself.
The Path Forward
The Rainmaker
Represents the forced release of hoarded resources back into the community. It acts as a pressure valve against administrative capture, ensuring the mission takes priority over the machine.
Title
Representative Institutions
Institutional Epochs
Historical Performance
| Year | Revenue | Top Comp | Comp % Rev | Score | Phase Label | Outlook | Details |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021 | — | — | — | 20 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2020 | — | — | 37.4% | 15 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2019 | — | — | 28.3% | 19 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2018 | — | — | 24.1% | 20 | Critical Intervention Needed | Decline Risk | |
| 2017 | — | — | 18.8% | 27 | Critical Intervention Needed | Recovery | |
| 2016 | — | — | 16.0% | 30 | Critical Intervention Needed | Stable Watch | |
| 2015 | — | — | 25.2% | 32 | Critical Intervention Needed | Gov Risk | |
| 2014 | — | — | — | 43 | Financially Distressed | Decline Risk | |
| 2013 | — | — | — | 51 | Fragile | Recovery | |
| 2012 | — | — | 11.7% | 35 | Fragile | Decline Risk | |
| 2011 | — | — | — | 43 | Financially Distressed | Stable Watch |
Officer compensation history
No IRS 990 Part VII compensation data available for this organization.
Score breakdown
The three components combine into a single 0–100 score weighted as shown. Full methodology →
Peer comparison
Compared to 98 other orgs in SC with NTEE prefix A6.
Most-divergent component: program score sits 23 points below the peer median (5 vs. 28).
5-year trend: Programmatic Contraction
Total revenue is stable, but the percentage of expenses spent on actual mission shrinks. Indicates administrative bloat and spending on the machinery of raising money rather than the art itself.
Overall score has gone from 27 → 20 over 5 years (declining by 7 points).
What's driving this score
- All-volunteer org with no paid officers — governance signal is neutral (default 50), not absent.
- Financial resilience score in the bottom quartile — reserves and liabilities ratios warrant review.
What would change this score
The two changes that would most improve this score:
- Build cash reserves to at least 3 months of operating expenses — moves financial resilience score meaningfully (~10 points).
Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.