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
31
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
5
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Structural Deficit

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2017 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2016 20.0% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 21.8% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2014 20.2% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2013 21.4% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2012 24.1% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
SAURAB BHARGAVA Board Member
CYNTHIA BRADY VICE PRESIDE
STEVEN GREENE Board President
STEVEN JOHNSON Treasurer
JAMES KARAGIANIS VICE PRESIDE
KATHI QUINN Board Member
SOMYUNG RYU Board Member
MARSHA SCHWARTZ Secretary
JOHN TETI Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
5 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
31 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 195 other orgs in IL with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 31 points below the peer median (5 vs. 36).

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).
  2. 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.