Structural Deficit
Structural Deficit
Structural Deficit Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
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
85
Score
Governance
85
Score
Financial
80
Score
Program
Score

Institutional Epochs

2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Structural Deficit

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2025 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 10.6% 35 Fragile Recovery
2022 12.0% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 6.8% 42 Fragile Recovery
2020 4.6% 41 Fragile Recovery
2019 39 Fragile Decline Risk
2018 47 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ALLISON MORGAN Board President 5.8% of Rev
JESSICA NANCE Secretary 2.1% of Rev
KRUDO DE JESUS CASTILLO Treasurer
STEVEN ULRICH Treasurer
GRACE MACINTYRE Board Member
CHAD MORGAN Board Member
MARSHALL GADDIS Board Member
SAMUEL BUSH-JOSEPH Board Member

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Allison Morgan Board President
Jessica Nance Secretary
Steven Ulrich Treasurer
Chad Morgan Board Member
Grace MacIntyre Board Member
Marshall Gaddis Board Member
Samuel Bush-Joseph Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
80 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
85 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
0 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
85 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 12,541 other orgs in US with NTEE prefix B2.

Most-divergent component: governance score sits 0 points above the peer median (85 vs. 85).

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.

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.