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
38
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Resource Divergence

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden 27.5% 38 Governance-Stressed Gov Risk
2023 7.6% 50 Fragile Stable Watch
2022 2.6% 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 5.9% 50 Fragile Recovery
2020 14.9% 41 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2019 13.3% 43 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2018 10.2% 49 Fragile Recovery
2017 22.4% 43 Fragile Gov Risk
2016 0.9% 55 Fragile Recovery
2015 17.6% 43 Fragile Decline Risk
2014 3.0% 55 Fragile Recovery
2013 11.8% 53 Fragile Recovery
2012 21.8% 43 Fragile Gov Risk

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Board Member 27.5% of Rev

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Board Member 30.1% of Rev
Board Member 25.7% of Rev

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Board Member 27.1% of Rev
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
50 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
38 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 245 other orgs in FL with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 20 points above the peer median (50 vs. 30).

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.

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. Reduce top-officer compensation from 27.5% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~11 points.

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