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
28
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
5
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 29.2% 28 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2023 21.8% 37 Fragile Recovery
2022 31.5% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 47.6% 24 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2020 37.7% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2019 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2018 27 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 23 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Amy Jorgensen Executive Director 29.2% of Rev
Scotti Hill Board President
Kelly Brooks Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
AMY JORGENSEN EXECUTIVE DI 26.3% of Rev
AMY JORGENSEN EXECUTIVE DI 26.3% of Rev
DAVID ALLRED Board Member
KELLY BROOKS Board Member
SCOTTI HILL Board President
MICOL HEBRON Board Member
KELLY BROOKS Board Member
SCOTTI HILL Board President
DAVID ALLRED Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
AMY JORGENSEN Board Member 24.9% of Rev
SCOTTI HILL Board Member
DAVID ALLRED Board Member
LAURA HURTADO Board Member
KELLY BROOKS MAMBER
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
5 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
28 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 19 other orgs in UT with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 17 points below the peer median (5 vs. 22).

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. Reduce top-officer compensation from 29.2% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~14 points.
  2. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).

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