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
40
Score
Governance
55
Score
Financial
15
Score
Program
60
Score

Institutional Epochs

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
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 6.6% 40 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2023 Hidden Hidden 6.3% 40 Financially Distressed Recovery
2022 7.9% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2021 9.0% 38 Financially Distressed Recovery
2020 7.6% 36 Financially Distressed Stable Watch
2019 2.7% 37 Financially Distressed Recovery
2018 15.7% 33 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2017 17.5% 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2016 14.7% 32 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2015 20.2% 31 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2014 13.8% 34 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 6.2% 40 Financially Distressed Recovery
2012 36 Financially Distressed Recovery
2011 17.7% 35 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
CLAUDIA ANATA HUBIAK EXECUTIVE DI 6.6% of Rev
EMILY GREENBERG Board President
CHRISTINA TRUSTY ROSS Board President
STACY GILBERT Treasurer
BRITTANY CERES Board Member
BRANDON LUNDELL Board Member
VERONICA LEMBERGER Board Member
ALYAH BAKER Board Member
VIVIAN KIM Board Member
CHRISTINA JOHNSON Board Member
STEPHEN BAUMANN Board Member
BARB PASSALACQUA Board Member
HEATHER KARIMI Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
CLAUDIA ANATA HUBIAK EXECUTIVE DI 6.3% of Rev
KATHLEEN ALT Board President
RACHAEL HARP Board President
EMILY GREENBERG Secretary
STACY GILBERT Treasurer
MARK RAGAN Board Member
LEAH ALEXIS Board Member
IVAN LOPEZ Board Member
JESSE MARKS Board Member
ADRIANA LLEWELYNN Board Member
BRITTANY CERES Board Member
AMY BRITTON Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
CLAUDIA ANATA HUBIAK EXECUTIVE DI 5.9% of Rev
CLAUDIA ANATA HUBIAK EXECUTIVE DI 1.9% of Rev
CLAUDIA ANATA HUBIAK EXECUTIVE DI 1.9% of Rev
KYLIE CRANDALL Board Member
RACHAEL HARP Board Member
ADRIANA LLEWELYNN Board Member
MARK RAGAN Board Member
KATHLEEN ALT Board President
LEAH ALEXIS Board President
EMILY GREENBERG Secretary
STACY GILBERT Treasurer
AMY BRITTON Board Member
BRITTANY CERES Board Member
KYLIE CRANDALL Board Member
RACHAEL HARP Board Member
ADRIANA LLEWELYNN Board Member
JESSE MARKS Board Member
MARK RAGAN Board Member
KATHLEEN ALT Board President
LEAH ALEXIS Board President
STACY GILBERT Treasurer
EMILY GREENBERG Secretary
AMY BRITTON Board Member
KATHLEEN ALT Board President
BRITTANY CERES Board Member
LEAH ALEXIS Board President
KYLIE CRANDALL Board Member
STACY GILBERT Treasurer
RACHAEL HARP Board Member
EMILY GREENBERG Secretary
ADRIANA LLEWELYNN Board Member
AMY BRITTON Board Member
MARK RAGAN Board Member
BRITTANY CERES Board Member
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
55 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
40 / 100
Priority Review

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

Peer comparison

Compared to 182 other orgs in CO with NTEE prefix A6.

Most-divergent component: program score sits 28 points above the peer median (60 vs. 32).

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).

Improving governance is a board decision. These are the levers.