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
32
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
0
Score
Program
60
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
2024 Hidden Hidden — — Unknown —
2023 Hidden Hidden 12.8% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2022 — — 14.4% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2021 — — 20.2% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2020 — — 19.0% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2019 — — 17.1% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2018 — — 23.3% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2017 — — 9.3% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2016 — — 11.9% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2015 — — 9.4% 46 Fragile Recovery
2014 — — 14.8% 36 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2013 — — 10.5% 36 Financially Distressed Recovery
2012 — — 13.6% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2011 — — 13.1% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
ELIZABETH BARRICKLOW Board Member 3.8% of Rev
RYAN SCHULTZ BUSINESS MANAGER 3.6% of Rev
ELIZABETH BARRICKLOW Board Member 3.3% of Rev
CATHERINE BARRICKLOW Board Member 3.0% of Rev
CATHERINE BARRICKLOW NOMAD MGR. 3.0% of Rev
GREER GALLOWAY ADMIN MANAGER 3.0% of Rev
KEIR HYATT Board Member 3.0% of Rev
GREER GALLOWAY ADMIN MANAGER 2.8% of Rev
RYAN SCHUTZ BUSINESS MANAGER 2.5% of Rev
ELIZABETH EMMITT-MATTOX Board Member 1.0% of Rev
MICHELE GARBER Board President —
NICK KEMP Treasurer —
NICK KEMP Treasurer —
LINDA ABELKIS Board President —
ERIN AGEE Board Member —
SHANA ROGERS Secretary —
BILL BLANCHETT Board Member —

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Elizabeth Barricklow Board Member 3.3% of Rev
Laurel Fisher Board Member 3.1% of Rev
Greer Galloway Admin Manager 2.8% of Rev
Catherine Barricklow Nomad Mgr. 2.8% of Rev
Keir Hyatt Board Member 2.8% of Rev
Courtney Nicoletti Board Member 2.5% of Rev
Pauline Dickey Bus. Manager 1.9% of Rev
Liz Emmett-Maddox Board Member 1.0% of Rev
Nick Kemp Treasurer —
Erin Agee Board President —
Shana Rogers Secretary —

Tax year 2022

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Greer Galloway Admin Manager 3.1% of Rev
Catherine Barricklow Nomad Mgr. 3.1% of Rev
Elizabeth Barricklow Board Member 3.0% of Rev
Laurel Fisher Board Member 3.0% of Rev
Keir Hyatt Board Member 2.3% of Rev
Pauline Dickey Bus. Manager 1.8% of Rev
Liz Emmett-Maddox Board Member 0.1% of Rev
Dr William Blanchet Board Member —
Linda Abelkis Board Member —
Nick Kemp Treasurer —
Erin Agee Board President —
Shana Rogers Secretary —
Lydia Woodard Board Member —

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
Elizabeth Barricklow Board Member 3.0% of Rev
Laurel Fisher Board Member 3.0% of Rev
Greer Galloway Admin Manager 2.5% of Rev
Catherine Barricklow Nomad Mgr. 2.5% of Rev
Keir Hyatt Board Member 2.3% of Rev
Pauline Dickey Bus. Manager 2.2% of Rev
Dr William Blanchet Board Member —
Linda Abelkis Board Member —
Liz Emmett-Maddox Board Member —
Nick Kemp Treasurer —
Erin Agee Board President —
Shana Rogers Board Member —
Audrey Wiebe Board Member —
Lydia Woodard Board Member —
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
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
32 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 138 other orgs in CO with NTEE prefix A2.

Most-divergent component: financial score sits 70 points below the peer median (0 vs. 70).

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.