Compensation Escalation Cycle
Compensation Escalation Cycle
Compensation Escalation Cycle Market Archetype Mechanical Natural
Tier
Developing
Trajectory Thumbprint

Compensation Escalation Cycle

"Serves as the central hub for elevating and promoting all arts and cultural activities in the Telluride region, providing comprehensive support for artists and broad access for the community and visitors."

— Statement of Program Service Accomplishments

What does this mean?

Revenue grows modestly, but top officer compensation grows consistently for 5 years, breaching danger zones. The executive is negotiating aggressive raises against a compliant board.

The Path Forward

The Steward

Re-establishes board supremacy over executive extraction. It freezes compensation and mandates that all future financial rewards be tied strictly to verifiable mission expansion.

The Steward
The Steward

Demonstrated Impact

  • 25 galleries participated in summer and winter gallery guides
  • 10 First-Thursday Art Walks hosted
Institutional Health Scores
5-yr trend: Compensation Escalation Cycle
Overall
48
Score
Governance
50
Score
Financial
40
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
Compensation Escalation

Historical Performance

Year Revenue Top Comp Comp % Rev Score Phase Label Outlook Details
2024 Hidden Hidden Unknown
2023 Hidden Hidden 13.1% 48 Fragile Decline Risk
2022 3.3% 55 Fragile Stable Watch
2021 6.1% 54 Fragile Recovery
2020 13.4% 51 Fragile Gov Risk
2019 4.8% 55 Fragile Recovery
2018 11.3% 46 Fragile Decline Risk
2017 48 Fragile Recovery
2016 32 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2015 29 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2014 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2013 35 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch
2012 35 Critical Intervention Needed Recovery
2011 29 Critical Intervention Needed Decline Risk
2010 33 Critical Intervention Needed Stable Watch

Officer compensation history

Tax year 2025

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
KATE JONES Executive Director 14.7% of Rev
KATE JONES Executive Director 13.0% of Rev
KATE JONES Executive Director 10.0% of Rev
BASIT MUSTAFA Board President
EDWARD A POWELL JR Board President
CHRIS HARDEN Treasurer
TESS PETERS Secretary
MICHELINE KLAGSBRUN Secretary
DOUGLAS BRADBURY Board Member
TODD BROWN Board Member
DIANA FARRELL Board Member
ASHLEY HAYWARD Board Member
Executive Director
PENELOPE P GLEASON Board President
CHRIS HARDEN Treasurer
BASIT MUSTAFA Board President
TESS PETERS Secretary
TODD BROWN Board Member
DOUGLAS BRADBURY Board Member
MICHELINE KLAGSBRUN Board Member
SEAN MAHONEY Board Member
CHRISTOPHER HO Board Member
SHASHEEN SHAH Board Member
KEN MERIDETH Board Member
BASIT MUSTAFA Board President
PENELOPE P GLEASON Board President
CHRIS HARDEN Treasurer
TESS PETERS Secretary
TODD BROWN Board Member
DOUGLAS BRADBURY Board Member
ASHLEY HAYWARD Board Member
MICHELINE KLAGSBRUN Board Member
EDWARD A POWELL JR Board Member
SEAN MAHONEY Board Member
CHRISTOPHER HO Board Member
SHASHEEN SHAH Board Member
KEN MERIDETH Board Member

Tax year 2023

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
KATE JONES Executive Director 10.0% of Rev
PENELOPE P GLEASON Board President
CHRIS HARDEN Treasurer
BASIT MUSTAFA Board President
TESS PETERS Secretary
TODD BROWN Board Member
DOUGLAS BRADBURY Board Member
MICHELINE KLAGSBRUN Board Member
SEAN MAHONEY Board Member
CHRISTOPHER HO Board Member
SHASHEEN SHAH Board Member
KEN MERIDETH Board Member

Tax year 2021

Name Title Phone Email Compensation
KATE JONES Executive Director 7.6% of Rev
KEN MERIDETH Board Member
ERIC CUMMINGS Board Member
SEAN MAHONEY Board Member
CHRISTOPHER HO Board Member
MICHELINE KLAGSBRUN Board Member
CHRIS HARDEN Board President
PENELOPE GLEASON Board President
TODD BROWN Treasurer
DOUGLAS BRADBURY Board Member
LESLIE TRUDEAU Secretary
Officer contact details, exact compensation figures, and active litigation are available to verified members.
Request access
Score breakdown

Score breakdown

Financial resilience
40 / 100
weight 40%
Governance risk
50 / 100
weight 40%
Program scale
60 / 100
weight 20%
Overall
48 / 100
Developing

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

5-year trend: Compensation Escalation Cycle

Revenue grows modestly, but top officer compensation grows consistently for 5 years, breaching danger zones. The executive is negotiating aggressive raises against a compliant board.

What's driving this score

What would change this score

No specific high-impact levers identified — this org's score is balanced across components.

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