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
39
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
25
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
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
2024 39 Fragile Stable Watch
2022 39 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 39 Fragile Recovery
2020 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2019 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 39 Fragile Recovery
2016 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2014 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 39 Fragile Recovery
2011 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
DR DIANE SCHAEL Secretary
ALISON BLEICK Board President
MARCIA HARRAN Treasurer
CHRIS JOHNSON Board President
ELIZABETH ROBERTS Board Member
GORDON MUIRHEAD Board Member
KAITLYN PACHINNI Board Member
COLLEEN PRICE Board Member
LISA MICHNICK Board Member
PAMELA CARR Board Member
DANIEL SPIKE Board Member
BRIDGET MCFEGGAN Board Member
DON CLEMENS Board Member
DENNIS ROSSOW Board Member
ROSALYN WESLEY Board Member
MARILYN DESTEFANO Board Member
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
25 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 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 13 points above the peer median (45 vs. 32).

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 31 → 39 over 5 years (improving by 8 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.