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
32
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Structural Deficit

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2021 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2020 7.0% 22 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2019 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 27 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 21 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 25 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 21 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2014 21 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2013 21 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2012 21 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2011 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JUSTIN KNIGHT Board President
FELIX FIDELIBUS Treasurer

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
JACK COLE Treasurer 1.5% of Rev
SYDNEY COHEN Board Member
CYNTHIA DZIURGOT Board Member
JESSICA FAIRCHILD Board Member
DAVID KLOS Board Member
JUSTIN KNIGHT Board Member
APRIL LAURITANO Board Member
RICHARD SCHULTZ Board Member
MICHAEL SOLLOA Board Member
ANDREA TOLEDANO Board Member
JAMES WILLIAMS Board Member
FRED JOHNSON Secretary
ALEJANDRO KALAF Board President
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
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
32 / 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 30 points below the peer median (0 vs. 30).

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.

Overall score has gone from 21 → 32 over 5 years (improving by 11 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. 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.