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
35
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
10
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2011
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
2025 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2024 — — 12.6% 35 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2023 Hidden Hidden 25.2% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 — — 16.5% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 — — 33.1% 38 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2020 — — 6.7% 42 Fragile Recovery
2019 — — 7.0% 36 Financially Distressed Recovery
2018 — — 3.9% 35 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2017 — — 6.2% 40 Fragile Recovery
2016 — — 3.4% 37 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2015 — — 6.0% 40 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2014 — — 6.0% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2013 — — 13.7% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 — — 5.6% 44 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Leo Eylar Board Member 8.0% of Rev
Kiri Loehmann Executive Dir. 4.5% of Rev
Tyson Mao Board President —
Jean Yee Treasurer —
Cheryl Cho-Phan Secretary —
Audrey Ho Secretary —
Brian Chan Board Member —
Hannah Chang Board Member —
Kevin Cho Board Member —
Lisa Oliver Board Member —
Wenqi Shao Board Member —
Vincent Sheu Board Member —
Lael Sigal Board Member —
Mark Stevens Board Member —
Yue Xu Board Member —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Leo Eylar Board Member 7.2% of Rev
Christopher McLaurin Executive Director 6.1% of Rev
Jim Hogan Executive Director 0.3% of Rev
Cheryl Cho-Phan Secretary —
Li Li Yin Board Member —
Sharon Chau Board Member —
Barbara Fritschen Board President —
Yvonne Ho Board Member —
D C Kim Board Member —
Jean Yee Treasurer —
Louise Tsoi Board Member —
John McGrory Board Member —
David Morley Board President —
Tyson Mao Board Member —
Diana Savastio Board Member —
Manju Radhakrishnan Board Member —
Jing Shao Board Member —
Erin Lo Board Member —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Jim Hogan Executive Direc 3.5% of Rev
Cheryl Cho-Phan Secretary —
Li Li Treasurer —
Sharon Chau Board Member —
Barbara Fritschen Board Member —
Yvonne Ho Board Member —
D C Kim Board Member —
Erin Lo Board Member —
Louise Tsoi Board Member —
John McGrory Board Member —
David Morley Board President —
Audrey Jee Board Member —
Diana Savastio Board Member —
Ann Dalton Board Member —
Christopher McLaurin Executive Dir. —
Kristie Kim Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
10 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
35 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 1,424 other orgs in CA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 43 points below the peer median (10 vs. 53).

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

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).
  2. Stabilize program expenses or grow earned-income revenue to break the consecutive-deficit pattern (~8 points to financial score).

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