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
40
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
15
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Structural Deficit

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 5.5% 40 Financially Distressed Recovery
2022 5.4% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 5.6% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2020 17.8% 25 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2019 5.9% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 3.8% 35 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2017 5.5% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 4.3% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2015 8.6% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2014 35 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2013 19 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ALVIN KEELS Board President
JERILYN HORNE Treasurer
CYNTHIA MELTON Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JERILYN HORNE Treasurer 2.3% of Rev
ALVIN E KEELS Board President 0.9% of Rev
CYNTHIA MELTON Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
15 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
40 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 146 other orgs in VA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 31 points above the peer median (60 vs. 29).

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.