Programmatic Contraction
Programmatic Contraction
Programmatic Contraction Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Priority Review
Trajectory Thumbprint

Programmatic Contraction

What does this mean?

Total revenue is stable, but the percentage of expenses spent on actual mission shrinks. Indicates administrative bloat and spending on the machinery of raising money rather than the art itself.

The Path Forward

The Rainmaker

Represents the forced release of hoarded resources back into the community. It acts as a pressure valve against administrative capture, ensuring the mission takes priority over the machine.

The Rainmaker
The Rainmaker
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Programmatic Contraction ↓
Overall
31
Score
Governance
42
Score
Financial
30
Score
Program
45
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Programmatic Contraction

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2021 — — 47.1% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Gov Risk
2020 — — 4.4% 37 Financially Distressed Recovery
2019 — — 15.9% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 — — 5.9% 30 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 — — 12.8% 36 Financially Distressed Recovery
2016 — — — 32 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 — — — 40 Fragile Recovery
2014 — — — 36 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2013 — — — 36 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2012 — — — 42 Fragile Stable Watch
2011 — — — 42 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Chip Decker Executive Dir. 25.7% of Rev
Laura Rice General Manager 21.4% of Rev
Laura Rice Executive Dir. 9.6% of Rev
Chip Decker Executive Dir. 0.4% of Rev
Shannon Reichley Chairman —
Janine D'Andrea Board President —
Anna Coon Secretary —
Melissa Frank Treasurer —
Matt Brown Board Member —
Heather Bard Board Member —
Lavina Chaves Board Member —
David Crane Board Member —
Allison Infinger Board Member —
Jess Dienna Board Member —
Rachel Roe Board Member —
Matt Joseph Board Member —
Shannon Reichley Chairman —
Janine D'Andrea Board President —
Anna Coon Secretary —
Melissa Frank Treasurer —
Matt Brown Board Member —
Heather Bard Board Member —
Lavina Chaves Board Member —
David Crane Board Member —
Allison Infinger Board Member —
Jess Dienna Board Member —
Rachel Roe Board Member —
Matt Joseph Board Member —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Chip Decker Executive Dir. 7.6% of Rev
Laura Rice General Manager 7.0% of Rev
Anna Coon Board Member —
Chris Ziegler Board President —
Margaux Karagosian Treasurer —
Shannon Reichley Board President —
Chris Anderson Secretary —
Rob Swaringen Board President —
Matthew Joseph Board Member —
Meg Wood Board Member —
David Crane Board Member —
Heather Bard Board Member —
Jess Dienna Board Member —
Melissa Frank Board Member —
Matt Brown Board Member —
Janine D'Andrea Board Member —

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Chip Decker Executive Dir. 24.7% of Rev
Laura Rice General Manager 20.4% of Rev
Karen Bernhardt Secretary —
Chris Ziegler Board President —
Margaux Karagosian Treasurer —
Shannon Reichley Board President —
Chris Anderson Board Member —
Rob Swaringen Board President —
Lilliana Wendorf Board Member —
David Crane Board Member —
Heather Bard Board Member —
Jess Dienna Board Member —
Lena Nelson Board Member —
Matt Brown Board Member —
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
30 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
42 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
31 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 222 other orgs in NC with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 22 points below the peer median (30 vs. 52).

5-year trend: Programmatic Contraction

Total revenue is stable, but the percentage of expenses spent on actual mission shrinks. Indicates administrative bloat and spending on the machinery of raising money rather than the art itself.

Overall score has gone from 36 → 31 over 5 years (declining by 5 points).

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 47.1% to under 22% of revenue — would move governance score by ~40 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.