Disappointing. Sad. Interesting that the process to rectify the foreseeable downfall wasn't able to tread the economic turmoil long enough to survive. It seems intricate enough and timely enough to have worked. "We went through some very good strategic planning for the last 18 to 24 months to try to figure out ways to either reduce programs, reduce operating costs, increase income. And unfortunately with the economy turning in 2008, the math just wasn't able to work."But the "math" didn't work. I'm curious as to why. When I take the above quote and usher it alongside this one: "And one of the lessons organizations will learn from Hull House, he says, is to diversify and to not be overly dependent on government funds. It's a message that comes too late for Hull House."...I'm wondering if this is really the ideal "lesson" to take from this story. So after 122 years of public service, this is the "lesson" that Hull House and other organizations should learn? Really?! I don't discard the wherewithal of organizational diversification or disregard the call to reflect on ideas that might help other organizations stay in service, but I'm wondering whether Cheryl Corley's sign-off tagline is the most appropriate. If we were to bring to the table the, perhaps antiquated, Hutchins Commission standards (all five) to measure this piece, I'd be interested in how it measures up to information for "A Free and Responsible Press."