# Deliverable 10 — Twelve-Week Pilot Protocol

## Riskiest assumption

The leading model (cohort-based shared funding office, later productized) depends on this claim: **a shared, readiness-first funding office measurably improves qualified-opportunity conversion, resource diversification, and leadership time compared with what the same organizations would achieve with a database subscription or ad hoc grant writing.**

Two subordinate assumptions could each break the model:

1. Small nonprofits will supply governance and financial documents within two weeks and act on a capacity sequence before applying. If they will not, readiness-first becomes a stall.
2. Nonprofits, or a sponsor on their behalf, will pay for preparation and intelligence rather than only for submitted applications or won grants. If payment only follows awards, the venture inherits the contingent-fee problem.

The pilot is designed so that either assumption can fail visibly.

## Hypothesis

H1: Within twelve weeks, at least five of eight cohort organizations will (a) complete at least 80 percent of their minimum fundable package, (b) activate at least two new resource channels, and (c) report at least four hours per week of leadership time saved on fundraising administration.

H0 (null): Fewer than four organizations meet all three conditions, or the completed pipeline is mostly ineligible or stale.

## Participants and recruitment

- **Cohort size:** five to eight New York City nonprofits.
- **Profile:** basic needs, education, community development, or technology access; annual budget between roughly $50,000 and $1.5 million; 501(c)(3) status or an executed fiscal-sponsorship agreement; a named leader who can commit four hours per week; board that meets at least quarterly.
- **Exclusions:** organizations without a legal wrapper (a DAO with no sponsor or entity may join as an observer while it executes A1 of the diagnostic); organizations in active litigation with a government funder; organizations whose leader cannot commit time.
- **Recruitment channels:** Nonprofit New York members, fiscal sponsors (Fund for the City of New York partner projects, FJC), Robin Hood or community-foundation program officers who know under-resourced grantees, borough nonprofit networks, faith networks, and the operator's own community.
- **Comparison:** a matched set of three to five organizations that receive only a database seat (for example, a Candid or Instrumentl subscription paid by the pilot) and a one-hour orientation. They complete the same baseline and week-12 survey. This is a comparison, not a randomized control; label results accordingly.

## Intervention

| Weeks | Activity | Output |
|---|---|---|
| 1 to 2 | Readiness diagnostic (Deliverable 3) with each org; document collection; baseline survey; consent | Scores, gap sequence, baseline |
| 3 to 4 | Minimum fundable package build; technology and in-kind audit; net-value calculation for each credit or license | Package folder; tech plan |
| 5 to 6 | Capital-ladder placement; verified opportunity pipeline of no more than twelve records per org, each with a verified pathway; relationship map | Pipeline; introduction list |
| 7 to 10 | Stage 1 community campaign (board give-or-get, recurring giving launch, one peer-to-peer or event); relationship outreach; go/no-go review; no more than three submissions per org | Campaign results; meetings; submissions |
| 11 to 12 | Reporting and stewardship setup; renewal plan; learning review; product feedback interviews; week-12 survey | Renewal plan; findings |

Cohort sessions: one 90-minute group session per week, plus one 60-minute individual session every two weeks. Shared services: research, verification, template library, technology-program enrollment, and a weekly go/no-go panel.

## Measures

### Leading indicators (weekly)

- Readiness items completed, by domain.
- Documents outstanding, by organization.
- Technology programs enrolled and net value estimated.
- Opportunity records created, verified, and retired as ineligible or stale.
- Relationship meetings held and warm introductions received.
- Leadership hours spent on fundraising administration (self-reported time log, twice weekly).

### Outcome measures (baseline and week 12)

| Measure | Definition | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Fundable-package completion | Percentage of the 84 diagnostic points achieved | Diagnostic |
| Resource channels activated | Count of distinct channels producing at least one dollar or in-kind item during the pilot | Ledger |
| Unrestricted funds mobilized | Dollars from individuals, board, community, unrestricted local grants | Ledger |
| Recurring donors activated | New monthly donors | Payment platform |
| In-kind value | Fair value of goods, space, services received | Ledger with valuation method |
| Technology cost avoided, net | Avoided license cost minus implementation and staff time | Net-value worksheet |
| Qualified opportunities | Records with verified pathway, eligibility met, gate met, go decision | Pipeline |
| Effort per qualified opportunity | Hours from identification to go decision | Time log |
| Submissions and outcomes | Submitted, pending, declined, awarded, with dollars | Pipeline |
| Concentration | Largest source as share of trailing 12-month revenue | Financials |
| Reporting readiness | Restricted-fund tracking and outcome instrument in place | Diagnostic C9, D5 |
| Leadership time saved | Change in weekly fundraising-administration hours | Time log |
| Satisfaction and renewal intent | 5-point scale plus willingness to pay question with three price points | Survey |

Grant awards are recorded but treated as lagging evidence. Most decisions arrive after week 12; schedule a six-month follow-up.

## Data, consent, and ethics

- Written participation agreement covering data use, confidentiality between cohort members, opportunity-allocation rules when two members target the same funder, and the right to withdraw.
- Collect only the documents required by the diagnostic; store in access-controlled folders per organization; retention of 24 months unless the organization requests deletion.
- No beneficiary personal data is collected by the pilot.
- The pilot operator does not sign applications, does not receive funds on behalf of any organization, and charges no fee contingent on awards. Confirm New York fund-raising-counsel registration status before the pilot begins (Deliverable 12).

## Thresholds and the decision each unlocks

| Result | Decision |
|---|---|
| **Success:** at least five of eight meet H1; comparison group meets fewer than two of three conditions; at least four organizations state willingness to pay at the middle price point | Proceed to a second cohort and a sponsor conversation; begin productizing verification and pipeline workflow |
| **Iterate:** three or four meet H1, or success in readiness but weak willingness to pay | Re-price toward sponsor-funded cohorts; shorten the readiness phase; test the fiscal-sponsor channel |
| **Stop or redesign:** fewer than three meet H1; organizations cannot supply core documents by week 4; pipeline is more than 40 percent stale or ineligible at week 6; no leadership time saved | Do not productize. Consider a narrower offer: readiness-only service sold to fiscal sponsors and funders |

## Limitations

- Small n; no randomization; self-reported time logs; twelve weeks is too short for award outcomes; operator effects are large in the first cohort; New York City rules do not generalize.

## Pilot budget outline (assumptions, not quotes)

Line items to cost before launch: one full-time-equivalent program lead for 14 weeks; part-time researcher and verifier; comparison-group database seats; template and workspace tooling (use nonprofit credits where the operator qualifies); legal review of participation agreement and Article 7-A status; stipends or fee waivers for cohort organizations; evaluation time. Record actual costs so the unit economics in Deliverable 9 are grounded.