Programmatic Contraction
Programmatic Contraction
Programmatic Contraction Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
Trajectory Thumbprint

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.

The Rainmaker
The Rainmaker
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Programmatic Contraction
Overall
56
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
60
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Programmatic Contraction

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2020 56 Fragile Recovery
2019 53 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 56 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 53 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 53 Fragile Recovery
2015 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2014 53 Fragile Stable Watch
2013 53 Fragile Stable Watch
2012 49 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 49 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
BRIAN NAGLE Board Member
MAUREEN CARTER Board Member
BECHTEL TRUSTS AND FOUNDATION Board Member
DIANE PUTHOFF Board Member
PAUL RUMLER Board Member
NATE CLARK Board Member
C DANA WATERMAN III Secretary
GREG SCHERMER Board President
YANLI CUI Board President
JAYNE BEHAL Treasurer
ADAM KUNKEL Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
60 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
56 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 104 other orgs in WI with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 23 points above the peer median (60 vs. 37).

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 53 → 56 over 5 years (improving by 3 points).

What's driving this score

What would change this score

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

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