Acute Resource Divergence
Acute Resource Divergence
Acute Resource Divergence Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Acute Resource Divergence

What does this mean?

Revenue is contracting significantly, but executive compensation percentage is rising. The organization is refusing to adjust its administrative overhead to match its new economic reality.

The Path Forward

The Realignment

Forces immediate balancing of administrative bloat against actual programmatic output. It demands that every dollar extracted for overhead be justified by community impact.

The Realignment
The Realignment
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Acute Resource Divergence
Overall
20
Score
Governance
45
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Resource Divergence

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2023 19.2% 20 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2022 24.1% 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 16.2% 39 Fragile Decline Risk
2019 45 Fragile Decline Risk
2018 55 Fragile Recovery
2017 49 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 49 Fragile Recovery
2015 47 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2013 51 Fragile Recovery
2012 51 Fragile Recovery
2011 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2010 47 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JENNIFER WELCH Artistic Director 20.4% of Rev
JOHN BEAL Treasurer
AMY MCKENZIE Secretary
BRIAN ALLEN Board Member
MARIE FERRAN Board Member
BETH ANDERSON Board Member
JIM REED Board Member
KERRI APPLE Board Member
CYNTHIA PUTNAM Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JENNIFER WELCH Artistic Director 15.0% of Rev
AMY MCKENZIE Secretary
KAREN STAGGS Board President
KERRI APPLE Board Member
JOHN BEAL Board President
MARK POET Board Member
BRIAN ALLEN Board Member
MARIE FERRAN Board Member
BETH ANDERSON Board Member
JIM REED Board Member
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
45 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
20 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Fewer than 3 peers found in TN for this NTEE subcategory; peer comparison would not be statistically meaningful.

5-year trend: Acute Resource Divergence

Revenue is contracting significantly, but executive compensation percentage is rising. The organization is refusing to adjust its administrative overhead to match its new economic reality.

Overall score has gone from 55 → 20 over 5 years (declining by 35 points). A multi-year directional move of this magnitude is a signal worth investigating.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).
  2. 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.