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
57
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
90
Score
Program
15
Score

Institutional Epochs

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 57 Fragile Recovery
2022 46 Fragile Recovery
2021 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2020 50 Fragile Recovery
2019 53 Fragile Stable Watch
2018 53 Fragile Recovery
2017 47 Fragile Recovery
2016 41 Fragile Decline Risk
2015 47 Fragile Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Bob Balsman Board President
Dale VanZant Board President
Deborah Heller Treasurer
Laura Bonnet Secretary
Bob Coombes Board Member
Karen Main Accompanist, Rehearsals For Soloists, Board Mbr
Ian Tinney Board Member
Michael Bonnet Board Member
Amy Hamilton Board Member
Kathy Pirie Board President
Nancy Mervar Grant Writer

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Bob Balsman Board President
Dale VanZant Board President
Deborah Heller Treasurer
Trudy James-Parks Secretary
Bob Coombes Board Member
Kathy Pirie Board President
Ian Tinney Board Member
Aimee Elsey Board Member
Karen Main Accompanist, Rehearsals For Soloists, Board Mbr
Scott Hamlin Board Member
Nancy Mervar Grant Writer
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
90 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
15 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
57 / 100
Stable

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 183 other orgs in CO with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 54 points above the peer median (90 vs. 36).

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 53 → 57 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.