Structural Deficit
Structural Deficit
Structural Deficit Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Structural Deficit

What does this mean?

Persistently low financial health over 5 years despite strong programmatic output. They are borrowing from their future (or bleeding an endowment) to pay for today's programs.

The Path Forward

The Truth-Teller

Forces necessary, painful cuts to preserve the core. It demands that the organization stop borrowing from its future and align its current programmatic output with actual sustainable revenue.

The Truth-Teller
The Truth-Teller
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Structural Deficit
Overall
28
Score
Governance
58
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Structural Deficit

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2023 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2022 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2021 4.0% 28 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2020 28 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2019 41 Financially Distressed Recovery
2018 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 47 Fragile Recovery
2014 45 Financially Distressed Recovery
2013 43 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2011 43 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Sally Boyett Artistic Director 11.1% of Rev
Sally Boyett Artistic Director 8.5% of Rev

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Sally Boyett Artistic Director 4.0% of Rev

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Sally Boyett Artistic Director

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Sally Boyett Artistic Director
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
0 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
58 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
28 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 75 other orgs in MD with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 33 points below the peer median (0 vs. 33).

5-year trend: Structural Deficit

Persistently low financial health over 5 years despite strong programmatic output. They are borrowing from their future (or bleeding an endowment) to pay for today's programs.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. 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.