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
38
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
15
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Structural Deficit

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 38 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2023 38 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2022 45 Fragile Recovery
2021 40 Fragile Stable Watch
2020 43 Fragile Recovery
2019 34 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 32 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2017 32 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2016 32 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 40 Fragile Stable Watch
2014 40 Fragile Recovery
2013 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PETER C VARISCHETTI Board President
DANIEL HAWKINS Board President
PAM STREICH Secretary
JOHN SUTIKA Treasurer
JOE SCARNATI Board Member
RAY CALHOUN Board Member
MICHELLE DIGILARMO Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PETER C VARISCHETTI Board President
DANIEL HAWKINS Board President
JOHN SUTIKA Treasurer
JOHN BLASDELL Board Member
RAY CALHOUN Board Member
MICHELLE DIGILARMO 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
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 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

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

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 43 → 38 over 5 years (declining by 5 points).

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.