Governance Lag
Governance Lag
Governance Lag Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Stable
Trajectory Thumbprint

Governance Lag

What does this mean?

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

The Path Forward

The Scaffold

Brings immediate structural maturity. It represents the necessity of outside, independent oversight to manage new scale, breaking the echo chamber of a founding 'friends and family' board.

The Scaffold
The Scaffold
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Governance Lag
Overall
51
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
65
Score
Program
30
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Financial Era
Governance Era
Trajectory Era
Governance Lag

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2023 Hidden Hidden 51 Fragile Recovery
2022 45 Fragile Recovery
2021 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2020 43 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2019 47 Fragile Decline Risk
2018 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2017 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2016 55 Fragile Recovery
2015 47 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2014 51 Fragile Recovery
2013 37 Financially Distressed Decline Risk
2012 45 Fragile Recovery
2011 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ROBERT BACA Artistic Director
JOEL BREED Secretary
DOMINIC DOMEYER Board Member
JOHN FRANCIS Board Member
JAMES HANKE Board Member
PATRICK HULL Board President
MARK KOXLIEN VICE PRESIDE
ANNA LOUGHRIDGE Board Member
KELLY WARNING Board Member
ALLEN WORTHEY Board Member
JAKE WRASSE Board Member
TYREL ZICH Treasurer
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
65 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
30 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
51 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 103 other orgs in WI with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 28 points above the peer median (65 vs. 37).

5-year trend: Governance Lag

Revenue and Program Scale spike rapidly, but the Governance Score remains stagnant. The organization has outgrown its founding era but hasn't installed proper oversight.

Overall score has gone from 47 → 51 over 5 years (improving by 4 points).

What's driving this score

What would change this score

The two changes that would most improve this score:

  1. 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.