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
15
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 13.9% 35 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 10.6% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 20.0% 23 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2020 10.0% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2019 11.3% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2018 10.9% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 13.7% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 12.7% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 12.1% 27 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2014 14.0% 24 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 15.4% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2012 7.3% 36 Financially Distressed Recovery
2011 31 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2026

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Limuel B Forgey III Board Member 11.2% of Rev
Jennifer Hartley Board Member
Fralisa Mcfall Board Member
Susan Connolly Board Member
Heidi Madson Board Member
Ryan Porter Board Member
Maria Balderrama Board Member
Vic Tomono Board Member
Kathryn Mcauley Treasurer
Cynthia Branson Secretary
John Sanders Board President
Ryan Porter Board President

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Limuel B Forgey III Board Member 14.0% of Rev
Fralisa Mcfall Board Member
Susan Connolly Board Member
Heidi Madson Board Member
Ryan Porter Board Member
Maria Balderrama Board Member
Kathryn Mcauley Treasurer
Teresa Gutierez Board President
Cynthia Branson Secretary
John Sanders Board President
Jennifer Hartley Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
NOEL KORAN Board Member 9.6% of Rev
JENNIFER HARTLEY Board Member
FRALISA MCFALL Board Member
SUSAN CONNOLLY Board Member
HEIDI MADSON Board Member
RYAN PORTER Board Member
MARIA BALDERRAMA Board Member
KATHRYN MCAULEY Treasurer
TERESA GUTIEREZ Board President
CYNTHIA BRANSON Secretary
JOHN SAUNDERS Board President

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
NOEL KORAN Board Member 10.3% of Rev
JENNIFER HARTLEY Board Member
FRALISA MCFALL Board Member
SUSAN CONNOLLY Board Member
HEIDI MADSON Board Member
MARIA BALDERRAMA Board Member
KATHRYN MCAULEY Treasurer
TERESA GUTIEREZ Board President
TODD VALLIE Board President
CYNTHIA BRANSON Secretary
JOHN SAUNDERS Board President

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
NOEL KORAN Board Member 8.3% of Rev
JENNIFER HARTLEY Board Member
FRALISA MCFALL Board Member
SUSAN CONNOLLY Board Member
HEIDI MADSON Board Member
JOHN SAUNDERS Board Member
KATHRYN MCAULEY Treasurer
TERESA GUTIEREZ Board President
TODD VALLIE Board President
CYNTHIA BRANSON Secretary
SEAN SCHMIDT Board President
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
15 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
45 / 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 235 other orgs in WA with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 26 points below the peer median (15 vs. 41).

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.