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
27
Score
Governance
45
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
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 15.3% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2022 15.9% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2021 24.6% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2020 18.8% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2019 18.1% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 18.1% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2017 19.4% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 19.0% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2015 14.1% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2014 17.1% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2013 18.9% 22 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 19.5% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2011 15.4% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PHYLLIS EVERETTE Board Member
KATHERINE HILTON Board Member
DANE KRICH Board Member
JOAN LEANOS Treasurer
DR DIANE LEBEDEFF Board Member
LAURA REBETSKY QUINN Secretary
LISA SHERWOOD Board President
MARK WYNN Board Member

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
PHYLLIS EVERETTE Board Member
KATHERINE HILTON Board Member
DANE KRICH Board Member
JOAN LEANOS Treasurer
DR DIANE LEBEDEFF Board Member
LAURA REBETSKY QUINN Secretary
LISA SHERWOOD Board President
MARK WYNN Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
J ERNEST GREEN Artistic Director 15.9% of Rev
PATRICIA BENDER Board Member
DR PAT CLAGETT Board Member
TIM DANGEL Board Member
CINDY DETORIE Board Member
PHYLLIS EVERETTE Board Member
BRUCE HARGUS Board Member
MARY HASELTON Board Member
RICHARD HUGHEN Treasurer
AL KIERSTEAD VICE PRESIDE
JOYCE PRATT Board Member
LAURA REBETSKY QUINN Board Member
MARILYN RHODOVI Board Member
LISA SHERWOOD Board President
FREDERICK WEINGARTEN Board Member
MARK WYNN Board Member
CORBY ZEREN Secretary

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
J ERNEST GREEN Artistic Director 14.0% of Rev
PATRICIA BENDER Board Member
DR PAT CLAGETT Board Member
TIM DANGEL Board Member
CINDY DETORIE Board Member
PHYLLIS EVERETTE Board Member
BRUCE HARGUS Board Member
MARY HASELTON Board Member
RICHARD HUGHEN Treasurer
AL KIERSTEAD VICE PRESIDE
JOYCE PRATT Board Member
LAURA REBETSKY QUINN Board Member
MARILYN RHODOVI Board Member
LISA SHERWOOD Board President
FREDERICK WEINGARTEN Board Member
MARK WYNN Board Member
CORBY ZEREN Secretary
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
0 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
45 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
27 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 75 other orgs in MD with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 33 points below the peer median (0 vs. 33).

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. Separate signing authority from fundraising authority when both are held by one person — removes the concentration penalty (~12 points).
  2. 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.