Governance Lag
Governance Lag
Governance Lag Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Governance Lag

What does this mean?

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

The Path Forward

The Scaffold

Brings immediate structural maturity. It represents the necessity of outside, independent oversight to manage new scale, breaking the echo chamber of a founding 'friends and family' board.

The Scaffold
The Scaffold
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Governance Lag
Overall
39
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
50
Score
Program
5
Score

Institutional Epochs

2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Governance Lag

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 39 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 46 Fragile Recovery
2021 22 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2020 44 Fragile Recovery
2019 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 41 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2017 41 Fragile Recovery
2016 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
GUILLERMO LEVYA BARLEY Treasurer
VILMA MACHIN PRINCIPI Board Member

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
GUILLERMO LEVYA BARLEY Treasurer
VILMA MACHIN PRINCIPI Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
GUILLERMO LEVYA BARLEY Treasurer
VILMA MACHIN Board Member

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
GUILLERMO LEVYA BARLEY Treasurer
VILMA MACHIN Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
GUILLERMO LEVYA BARLEY Treasurer
VILMA MACHIN Board Member
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
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
5 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
39 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 195 other orgs in IL with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 27 points below the peer median (5 vs. 32).

5-year trend: Governance Lag

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

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