Business Plan: Eduardo Arango, Cortney Cino, Allison Hamilton, Adam Nodiff, Travis Umbleby, Luis de Zengotita

BUSINESS PLAN
BY
November 22, 2013

Presented by Team Better2Gether
Eduardo Arango, Cortney Cino, Allison Hamilton,
Adam Nodiff, Travis Umbleby, Luis de Zengotita
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 5
Description of Venture ........................................................................................................................ 8
DoGoods Appeal............................................................................................................................................... 8
DoGood Brings Value to Distinct Audiences .......................................................................................... 9
Good2Gether Company Overview ............................................................................................................. 9
How the Story Began .................................................................................................................................. 9
Strong Intellectual Property ..................................................................................................................... 10
Industry and Competitive Analysis ............................................................................................... 11
The Future of Mobile Giving...................................................................................................................... 11
Closing the Gap for Nonprofit Organizations................................................................................. 11
Generosity of Individuals Via Mobile Devices ............................................................................... 11
Individual Donor Habits......................................................................................................................... 12
The Evolution of Corporate Social Responsibility Programs .................................................. 13
Crowdfunding Trends ............................................................................................................................. 14
Five Forces Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 15
Suppliers ...................................................................................................................................................... 16
Buyers ........................................................................................................................................................... 16
Competitors and Substitutes ................................................................................................................ 16
New Entrants.............................................................................................................................................. 18
SWOT Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 19
Strengths........................................................................................................................................................... 19
Weaknesses ..................................................................................................................................................... 19
Opportunities .................................................................................................................................................. 19
Threats .............................................................................................................................................................. 20
Marketing Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 22
Objectives ......................................................................................................................................................... 22
Segmentation .................................................................................................................................................. 22
Nonprofits ................................................................................................................................................... 22
Individual Donors ..................................................................................................................................... 23
Corporate Sponsors ................................................................................................................................. 23
Success in Selling ........................................................................................................................................... 25
DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 2
Nonprofits ................................................................................................................................................... 25
Priced to Optimize Use ................................................................................................................................ 25
Nonprofits ................................................................................................................................................... 25
Place of Access ................................................................................................................................................ 28
Nonprofits and Corporate Sponsors ................................................................................................. 28
Unique Promotion ......................................................................................................................................... 28
Engaging Nonprofits and Corporations ........................................................................................... 28
Engaging the Individual User ............................................................................................................... 29
Operations Plan ................................................................................................................................... 31
Location for Innovation .............................................................................................................................. 31
Equipment and Technology Utilization ................................................................................................ 31
The Right Labor Mix ..................................................................................................................................... 31
Overhead .......................................................................................................................................................... 32
Flow of Orders ................................................................................................................................................ 32
Organizational Plan ............................................................................................................................ 34
Flexible Legal Structure .............................................................................................................................. 34
Principal Shareholders ................................................................................................................................ 34
The Management Team .............................................................................................................................. 34
Roles and Responsibilities of Members of the Organization ........................................................ 36
Board of Advisors .......................................................................................................................................... 37
Good2Gethers Company Culture ............................................................................................................ 37
Risk Assessment .................................................................................................................................. 38
Accounting for Risks - Inventory and Action ...................................................................................... 38
Regulation ................................................................................................................................................... 39
Cyber ............................................................................................................................................................. 39
Market ........................................................................................................................................................... 39
Consumer..................................................................................................................................................... 40
Long-Term Sustainability........................................................................................................................... 40
Financial Assessment......................................................................................................................... 42
Income Statement ......................................................................................................................................... 42

Balance Sheet .................................................................................................................................................. 42
Cash Flow ......................................................................................................................................................... 43
Sensitivity ......................................................................................................................................................... 43
Appendix A: Qualitative Interviews .............................................................................................. 55
Discussion Guides ......................................................................................................................................... 55
Interview Results .......................................................................................................................................... 59
Appendix B: Quantitative Survey................................................................................................... 61
Questionnaire ................................................................................................................................................. 61
Survey Results ................................................................................................................................................ 67
Appendix C: Overhead Rates in Nonprofit Organizations ..................................................... 72
Appendix D: Top 50 Cause organizations in U.S. ...................................................................... 73
Appendix E: Calendar of Monthly Marketing Promotions .................................................... 75
Executive Summary
Good2Gether Defines the Next Generation of Social Fundraising
Finding additional sources of funding is the lifeblood of nonprofit organizations.
Traditional ways of donating to a cause are inefficient and expensive. Writing checks, giving
cash, or creating an online profile to make a one-time donation are time consuming and
discouraging to potential supporters. In addition, tracking and managing donations are
challenging tasks for nonprofit organizations to handle internally.
Good2Gether is founded on the idea that individuals, nonprofits, and businesses need to
better utilize technology to improve the way they connect and interact with one another.
One of the major challenges non-profits experience is engaging and appealing to the
donation/fundraising preferences of the Millennial generation (18-34 years old).
Good2Gether has solved this problem with a mobile giving application called DoGood that
provides nonprofits with unprecedented access to a network of individuals who prefer
project based campaigns, enjoy participating in crowd-funding, expect to share experiences
and find content on social media.
Ubiquitous Smartphones and Mobile Payments Hold the Key
56 percent of U.S. adults now have a smartphone, and one in three is using a mobile device
as their primary access to the Internet. This means consumers are connected at all times
and in all places. As these devices become more powerful and innovative in simplifying the
process of participating in social circles, people have become more dependent on them. We
have not, however, lost our connection with human nature and a desire to do good in our
communities. This prominence of smartphone usage is making a mobile strategy more
critical than ever for nonprofits to capture this desire to do good. As such, an amazing, yet
untapped, opportunity exists for nonprofit organizations to not only collect donations
through a mobile platform, but to connect with the Millennial generation who does not
respond to traditional fundraising approaches the way previous generations have.
DoGood Puts Millennials at the Forefront of Design to Help Nonprofits Grow
Many nonprofits understand this generation needs to become a priority and they realize
that Millennial engagement can have a great return for the organizations growth and
sustainability. Millennials grew up using smartphones, laptops, and tablets, so it comes as
little surprise that this generation expects their giving to take place online. Unfortunately,
most nonprofits do not have the resources to invest in tools that meet the next generations
expectations regarding solicitation and the donation process. DoGood is well suited to close
this gap.
DoGood is a unique mobile giving application that combines and leverages proven
techniques from other fundraising verticals. This game changing application provides
nonprofits with an economic, simple, and effective way to create fundraising campaigns
that will successfully appeal to Millennials in four critical ways:
1. Project Based Micro Donation Options: Supporter preferences for when, where, and
how to give have drastically changed over the last six years since the launch of the
iPhone in 2007, other smartphones, and tablets. Millennials demand to know exactly
how their money is positively impacting the organization and their community and
perceive donating to a general fund as throwing money into a black hole. Survey results
show that 83% of Millennials prefer to donate to a fundraising campaign that has a
specific project based cause rather than a request for contributions to the
organizations general fund.
Survey results also show that 60% of Millennials only expect to give donations in
increments of $25 or less. Good examples are the text to give campaigns supporting
earthquake victims in Haiti and the tsunami survivors in Indonesia. Both campaigns
focused on the idea of micro donations ($5 or $10) from a mass group for a specific
cause. The campaigns were wildly successful in total funds raised and the speed in
which people donated to the causes. The DoGood application will take the success of
micro donations beyond the support of disaster relief, to solve the everyday funding
challenges of nonprofits.
2. Transparency: When it comes to fundraising, one of the biggest frustrations among
Millennials is confusion regarding how their gift is making a difference. Survey results
indicate that close to 50% of Millennials feel that how nonprofit organizations use their
donations are moderately clear at best. Millennials want to see the tangible results of
their giving, and DoGood provides this. Fundraising campaigns will have a defined
dollar amount goal that is communicated to potential donors with a specific purpose,
rather than an open-ended request for funds. Campaign progress (the current amount
of donations received) will be tracked on the application and will also be visible to all
users (and the nonprofit) in real time.
3. Social and Interactive Campaigns: Users of the application are able to share their
behavior (donation, or intent to donate), or affection for particular organizations and
their campaigns via their own social network platforms (e.g. Twitter, Facebook, etc.).
Users of DoGood will be able to indicate they participated in the cause by clicking an I
Gave button, as well as share written messages or recorded videos (a future feature of
the application) with their friends. Thus, DoGood not only connects nonprofits with
individuals who download the application, but also with their social media network.
4. Opt-in Push Notification: Millennials are less likely to read messages with too much
content because they are considered overwhelming, which is why short push
notifications will be used. Users will also only be contacted by the nonprofits they
follow within the application, thus giving them full control over communication terms,
such as how many times organizations are able to contact them, how frequently, and for
what type of campaigns. The donation process is quick and easy, (just hit a button), and
perfectly plays to the preferences of Millennials who like to give in the moment.
Financing the Venture
Angel investors and venture capitalists have already validated the vision of DoGood. A total
of $3M in funding has already been secured. This investment has been used to develop the
base platform of DoGood and support for operations through 2014. We are asking for an
additional $1.5M for 30% equity in the company as we continue to develop the features of
the application and begin to expand our engagement nationally.
After projecting the performance of DoGoods business models for the next five years
DoGood will begin to generate positive cash flows by the first quarter of 2016, reaching net
profits of $14.8M by 2018. DoGoods business model is highly leverageable, in terms of
product offering and cost structure, enabling the company to maintain the potential for
doubling net profits by 2018 under favorable business conditions. However, it is also
encouraging that even with a wide variation of 50% from our initial assumptions, DoGood
would still be able to generate, although modest, positive net profits by 2018.
DoGoods Expansion Potential is Vast
With the explosive growth of the mobile smartphone industry over the past five years, it is
clear that there are new and growing market opportunities that are here to stay. Coupled
with the growth in individual charitable giving, cause marketing, and social media, DoGood
is uniquely positioned for tremendous growth as the gold standard for mobile giving
applications. DoGood has the opportunity to develop a portfolio of cause-oriented features
on their application to increase the value for cause-oriented consumers, businesses, and
nonprofits alike. Such features will include volunteer crowd sourcing, co-branded nonprofit
and business cause marketing deals, video functionality and sharing, and gamification for
DoGood friendly cause competitions. All of these features will offer ancillary revenue
streams while supporting the development of the user base for network effects, customer
value, and primary revenue generation for years to come.
A Management Team Poised for Success
The management team at Good2Gether brings the right mix of skills to make DoGood a
sustainable success story. Brian Leamy, Chief Executive Officer, possesses an extensive
background in technology solutions enabling charitable giving. Brian was the Executive in
Charge of mGive, the leader in Short Message Service (SMS) mobile giving for US charities.
Brian also brings years of experience building global online donation processing and
volunteering solutions for United Way Worldwide, as well as seven years of technology
consulting experience. Greg McHale, founder of Good2Gether and VP of Business
Development, brings over 20 years of experience in sales, marketing, and technology. This
experience, coupled with over five years of experience working on technology solutions
specifically for cause organizations, makes Greg a terrific fit to drive Good2Gethers mission
and business development. Ashish Khan, Chief Technology Officer, brings over 20 years of
experience leading and executing initiatives related to strategic planning, building CRM and
e-Business platforms, and building point solutions to enable successful marketing
campaigns and customer facing capabilities. Ashish recently joined Good2Gether from
Digitas where he served as a Senior Vice President.
Business Contact Information
Greg McHale, Founder of Good2Gether
Greg@Good2gether.com
http://signup.good2gether.com
45 Prospect Street, Central Square Cambridge, MA 02139
Description of Venture
Good2Gether was founded on the idea that mobile technology can improve the way individuals,
nonprofits, and businesses connect and interact with one another. One of the major challenges
nonprofits experience is engaging and appealing to the donation/fundraising preferences of the
Millennial generation (18-34 years old). Good2Gethers DoGood mobile application has solved this
problem. DoGood provides nonprofits with unprecedented access to a network of individuals who
prefer project-based campaigns, enjoy participating in crowdfunding, expect to share experiences
with others, and find content on social media.
DoGoods Appeal
The DoGood smartphone application enables any cause
organization to quickly and easily create, manage, and
measure a mobile social giving campaign. Taking
advantage of proven techniques from other fundraising
verticals, this game changing application provides
nonprofits with a simple and effective way to create
fundraising campaigns that will successfully appeal to
Millennials in four critical ways:
Figure 1: DoGood Screenshots
Project Based Small Donation Options: Survey

results show that 83% of Millennials prefer to donate
to a fundraising campaign that has a specific projectbased cause rather than a request for contributions to
the organizations general fund.1 These project-based
campaigns are important because Millennials demand to know exactly how their money is
positively impacting the organization and their community. Survey results also show that 60%
of Millennials only expect to give donations in increments of $25 or less2, and this crowdfunding
application is specifically designed for small donations. This application allows a group of
people to support mutually interesting causes with small donations that, in aggregate, provide a
significant contribution to a cause.
Transparency: When it comes to fundraising, one of the biggest frustrations among Millennials
is not knowing how their gift is making a difference. Survey results indicate that close to 50% of
Millennials feel that how nonprofit organizations use their donations are moderately clear at
best.3 Millennials want to see the tangible results of their giving, and DoGood provides this.
Fundraising campaigns will have a defined dollar amount goal that is communicated to potential
donors with a specific purpose, rather than an open-ended request for funds. Campaign
progress (the current amount of donations received) will be tracked on the application and will
be visible to all users (and the nonprofit) in real time.
Social and Interactive Campaigns: Users and potential donors of the application are able to
share their behavior (donation, or intent to donate), or affection for particular organizations and
their campaigns via their own social network platforms (e.g. Twitter, Facebook, etc.). Users of
DoGood will be able to indicate they participated in the cause by clicking an I Gave button, as
well as share written messages or recorded videos (a future feature of the application) with
their friends. Thus, DoGood not only connects nonprofits with individuals who download the
application, but also with their social media network.
Opt-in Push Notification: People will only be contacted by the nonprofits they follow within
the application. Thus, users will have full control over communication terms, such as how many
times organizations are able to contact them, how frequently, and for what type of campaigns.
Millennials are less likely to read messages with a lot of content because they consider them
overwhelming, which is why push notifications on DoGood will be focused on only the most
important call to actions. A full story and a link to more information will be available if the user
chooses to access that information. The donation process is quick and easy, (just hit a button),
and perfectly plays to the preferences of Millennials who like to give in the moment.
DoGood Brings Value to Distinct Audiences

Nonprofits: Cause organizations struggle to reach the Millennial generation. Currently, only
individuals who are truly interested in volunteering their time or donating to the organization get
involved. Even when nonprofits do reach this audience, the act of actually donating is often delayed
because the individual has to research or verify the causes credibility. A mobile social giving
application solves this problem. Yet, because nonprofits experience incredible pressures to reduce
overhead costs, most have not been able to invest the necessary resources to solve this problem by
creating applications of their own. Moreover, they often lack a dedicated marketing staff or a large
enough communication/advertising budget to get noticed. DoGood solves both of these problems.
Individuals: Millennials and others who want to volunteer or donate to charity are often
discouraged because it takes time and effort to research and find worthy nonprofit causes. Others
feel bombarded by a multitude of communication efforts on various channels. People often have to
put in the work to learn about nonprofit organizations, which is counter to how this generation
currently absorbs information. They are used to and expect to have important information
immediately accessible and at their fingertips. Additionally, Millennials prefer transparency
regarding where their donation is going and what percentage the organization is receiving. DoGood
improves the flow of how all this content is delivered.
Businesses: Millennials are demanding more social responsibility programs from the business they
support, and nonprofits often do not have the means to make much needed connections with
potential corporate sponsors. DoGood encourages organizations with corporate social
responsibility programs to join the application. This will help them find causes and projects that
they can sponsor or co-market. DoGood will increase collaboration between nonprofits and
business. The application will ultimately reduce the hurdle businesses often endure of identifying
campaigns that fit their corporate mission and resonate with their target customer.
Good2Gether Company Overview

How the Story Began
Gregory McHale founded Good2Gether in 2007 in Melrose, MA, with $1.5M in angel funding. The
company has since moved its headquarters to Cambridge, MA. Good2Gethers initial offering was
an advertising-supported, keyword-based widget designed to appear alongside news stories on
the websites of major regional media organizations, where it displays information about local nonprofit fundraising campaigns or volunteer opportunities related to each article.4 In other words,
when someone would read an article in an online paper, they would be able to click on links to
fundraising or volunteer opportunities right from the article. This solution helped reach
Millennials, a generation that has grown up using the Internet. The traditional channels that non-
profits were using to market their events or funding needs were not reaching this audience. The
web-based platform, called Connect2Cause, had success in cities around the country.5 In 2012,
Good2Gether decided to further their ability to connect individuals to causes by developing the
DoGood smartphone application. Good2Gether is currently working to launch the DoGood
application.
Strong Intellectual Property

Currently, the company has registered and received trademark rights to DoGood. Good2gether
has plans to pursue trademark rights to DoGood Give. There are other companies registered with
similar names (such as "Do Good Marketing"). With this in mind, Good2Gether will be very careful
about branding and messaging to avoid confusion and any possible trademark issues.
Regarding patents for the method of donation or the method to connect nonprofits to corporations,
similar patents in this field probably make acquiring a patent challenging. Additionally, these
patents are probably not worth the expense because competitors in the application market will
likely be able to design around the patent. Good2Gether believes there are other more effective
routes to protect the brand including trademarks, trade dress, and copyright protection.
As DoGood gains in popularity as an application, we will consider trade dress protection to protect
the "look and feel" of the application. To secure this, Good2Gether will apply a consistent look and
feel to the layout and offer distinctive qualities (e.g., placement of modules, unique color scheme) to
help us acquire this protection in order to protect Good2Gether from competitors using the same
scheme in their competing/similar applications.
Industry and Competitive Analysis

Mobile payments may be in the midst of a revolution, as Mintel projects the U.S. as two to five years
away from achieving critical mass where this type of payment method becomes accepted as the
norm for merchants and consumers.6 This prominence of smartphone usage is making a mobile
strategy more critical than ever for nonprofits.7 As such, an amazing, yet untapped, opportunity
exists for nonprofit organizations to not only collect donations through a mobile platform, but to
also connect with the Millennial generation who does not respond to traditional fundraising
approaches the way previous generations have. By capitalizing on the four critical and unique
features mentioned in the previous section, DoGood will meet the needs of all major stakeholders
and will win in a growing market where existing competitors have historically struggled to capture
the Millennial donation pool.
The Future of Mobile Giving

Closing the Gap for Nonprofit Organizations
There are a total of 1.6M registered nonprofit organizations in the U.S. as of 2012.8 Nonprofit
organizations can be classified into several groups. The largest are 501(c)(3) organizations, which
represent approximately 70%, or 1.1M, of nonprofits and are mandated to benefit broad public
interest. 501(c)(3) organizations fall into eight major categories: Arts/culture/humanities,
education/research, environment/animals, health services, human services, international/foreign
affairs, public/social benefit, and religion.9 In terms of organizations receiving charitable donations,
religious organizations received the largest share, with 32% of total estimated contributions. The
remaining 30% of nonprofits are predominantly made up of educational institutions and human
service organizations.10
Many nonprofits understand this
generation needs to become a priority and
Nonprofits face significant challenges in
they realize that Millennial engagement can marketing their services to potential donors and
have a great return for the organizations
developing their brand. Marketers within these
growth both now and in the future
organizations are struggling to vie for supporters
attention and a lack of investment in marketing at
their organizations. Although 42% of larger organizations, those with marketing budgets greater
than $5M, have formal marketing plans, among the smaller organizations, those with marketing
budgets less than $5M, only 20% have plans.11 Not only are these organizations battling the
pressures to reduce overhead (See Appendix C), but they are also missing the tools required to be
successful with the budget they do have. This demonstrates a need for easy to use, low cost tools
such as DoGood - that can help smaller organizations reach existing and new donors. The most
appropriate channel for such a tool exists through online and social media.12
Adding to this challenge is the difficulty lower budget nonprofit organizations have addressing the
Millennial generation. Many nonprofits understand this generation needs to become a priority and
they realize that Millennial engagement can have a great return for the organizations growth both
now and in the future.13 However, nonprofit marketers struggle to find funding for their
departments due to extremely stringent levels of overhead allowed by funders, nor do they have an
optimized approach for getting the Millennial audience connected and involved.
Generosity of Individuals Via Mobile Devices
56 percent of U.S. adults now have a smartphone14, and one in three are using a mobile device as
their primary access to the Internet.15 This means consumers are connected at all times and in all
places. The integration of mobile devices into every aspect of our lives has created a culture that is
hyper aware and involved in the global community. As these devices become more powerful and
innovative in simplifying the process of participating in social circles, people have become more
dependent on them. We have not, however, lost our connection with human nature and a desire to
DoGood in our communities. As people learn of tragedies around the world, they are drawn to
offer support and mobile giving has lowered the barriers to do so. Due to the simplicity of mobile
giving and the aggregation effects, micro-donations, which at one point were too costly to pursue,
are now very lucrative. Of the $3.6M donations made through eBay in 2012, 99% were $5 or less.
For this same time period, eBay saw a 228% increase in mobile giving.16 Furthermore, in a study of
mobile donations for the earthquake in Haiti, 73% of mobile donations were made within 24 hours
of learning of the cause. This is growing as 43% of donors encourage friends and family to
participate in mobile giving.17
Individual Donor Habits
In 2012, U.S. private giving to nonprofits was estimated at $316B.18 Contributions came from four
groups, with a 72% majority, or $227B directly from
individuals. Total estimated charitable giving
Figure 2: Breakout of 2012 Private Giving
increased for the third consecutive year in 2012,
rising 3.5% over 2011 totals.19 The largest
influence on this increase was a 3.9%, or
2012 Total Private Giving
s to Nonprofit
additional 8.67B, in gifts made by individuals
Corpora ons,
over 2011.
4% $13B
$316 Billion
Individual
Bequests, 8%,
In addition to overall contributions among
$25B
individuals increasing over the past few years,
specific behavior toward charitable giving has
Founda ons,
Individual
Up
16%, $50B
changed in a number of ways that will benefit
Donors,
3.9%,
DoGood. A recent Harris Poll20 suggests that
72%,
$8.67B
since
$227B
more than half of the population is using social
2011
networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter,
LinkedIn and others to follow companies and
Individuals represent the largest population of people who
nonprofit organizations. In addition, 39% of
donate to nonprofits, and increased the amount they
individuals reported that they took action as a
donated over the last year by $8.67B or 3.9%.
result of following a cause online. Within this
group, over half (54%) say they have talked to a friend or a family member after reading something
on a nonprofit or charitable organizations social networking site, 31% have made a financial
contribution to the organization, 23% have made a financial contribution to a cause the
organization supports, and 23% have attended an event sponsored by the organization.21
2
This social networking behavior is even more

Social networking behavior is even more
evident among Millennials, of which only 17%
evident among Millennials, of which only
prefer to learn about a nonprofit through face17% prefer to learn about a nonprofit
to-face interaction.22 Furthermore, although
through face to face interaction.
Millennials are making technology an integral
part of their communication habits, not all mobile channels are desirable by this group when it
comes to receiving information from nonprofits. For example, in a focus group conducted with
Millennials, it was clear that they do not want to receive texts or calls from nonprofits, citing that
these channels should be reserved for more personal forms of communication.23 Millennials also
preferred not to donate via text to avoid charges on their phone bill and not have their donation
limited to $10. While, 70% indicate they would prefer to use a mobile website, when asked why
they do not prefer to give through mobile site or application, 47% indicated it is because they
havent been provided an opportunity to yet.24 DoGood provides this opportunity.
The Evolution of Corporate Social Responsibility Programs
Over the past two decades Corporate Social
Figure 3: Breakout of Corporate Giving
Responsibility (CSR) has evolved from
a voluntary set of ideals to more of a
social mandate. Companies need to offer
economic, social, and environmental
returns in order to receive societys
license to operate. The need for
organizations in both public and private
sectors to behave in a socially
responsible way is becoming a
generalized requirement of society.25 In
2012, 6% ($19B) of all denotations
came directly from corporations.26
However, this amount is substantially
higher as 11% ($5.2B) of the $47B
donated by foundations came from
6%, or $19B, of all charitable giving comes from corporation, as well
business-funded foundations.27 In 2012,
as a portion from business-funded foundations ($5.2B).
total corporate donations were $24B,
increasing by 11% from the previous
year.28 Another indicator that reflects the growing importance of CSR among corporations is that by
2012, 490 29 of the Fortune 500 companies had references to CSR on their web sites as compared to
420 in 1998.30
The main motivations for companies to engage in CSR are: 1) consumer expectations 2) regulatory
oversight, and 3) industry competition. Studies show that although a relatively small number of
consumers (30%) say that corporate ethical behavior impacts their purchasing decisions, nearly
80% say that bad corporate behavior would be a deterrent to purchasing from a company.
Consumers that indicated corporate ethical behavior influences their purchasing decisions made an
average of 3.1 purchases in the past six months based on claims of social responsibility (vs. the 2.2
purchases of an average consumer in the past six months). Local engagement, responsible labor
practices, and clarity of commitment with measurable results ranked as the most compelling CSR
initiatives.31
Although CSR initiatives can create good will, CSR marketing that does not align well with a
companys basic mission is likely to be ineffective. Companies that dont communicate a clear
understanding of how their CSR campaign fits into their business as a whole will tend to be viewed
with suspicion by consumers who may sense a lack of commitment. DoGood enables businesses to
more easily locate potential partnerships. As CSR becomes more common across a variety of
industry sectors, the absence of a well-articulated plan to improve operations for the greater good
may be generally interpreted as a lack of concern for social issues.32
Crowdfunding Trends
Figure 4: Global Crowdfunding Stats (Source: Massolution)
The power of connectivity and
collaboration among a wide
array of individuals has
generated exponential growth
opportunities for web-based
applications. Crowdfunding, or
collaborative funding via the
Internet, is one of the newest
trends. The idea behind it is that
through the power of the
Internet, and most recently
mobile platforms, nonprofits and
entrepreneurs can develop
online group-based fundraising
More than 1 Million successful fund-raising campaigns were run by
campaign for their causes.
crowdfunding in 2011.
People from around the world
can get together in order to fund and support mutually interesting causes or business ventures.
Recent studies show that the overall crowdfunding industry raised $2.7B in 2012 across more than
1M individual campaigns globally. In 2013, the industry is projected to grow to $5.1B. By the end of
2011, there were 452 crowdfunding platforms active worldwide.33 The most well-known
companies in the industry are Indiegogo, Kickstarter, Kiva and ArtistShare. However, each of these
companies targets a different market segment. Some solely focus on entrepreneurs while others
focus on philanthropy. Crowdfunding is a relatively cheap channel to raise funds. 42% of the
companies providing crowdfunding services charge a commission ranging from 2% to 25%
(average of 7%) of the donations. Most of the remaining sites charge a fix rate, which is an average
of $15 per campaign.34
There are two popular and very successful crowdfunding models currently used: investment based
and donation based. The donation based model enables supporters of causes or organizations to
donate towards achieving a collaborative goal. The donors main motivations are a feeling of selfsatisfaction, a sense of being a member of a
community, and the ideals of working
By leveraging the power of the crowd,
towards philanthropic goals. In some cases,
nonprofits and causes can exponentially
the cause organization provides its donors
broaden their base of supporters and donors
with rewards in return. The success of these
at a minimal cost and develop a sense of
campaigns is primarily determined by how
community and commitment around their
emotionally attached the donors are to the
social enterprises.
cause. In 2012, 49% ($1,320M) of the funds
raised by crowdfunding were under this category.35 The marketing and messaging of the cause
substantially influences its funding outcome.
Slava Rubin, founder and CEO of Indiegogo, one of the leading companies in the industry, points out
that "We've moved from a world of transactions to a world of relationships," which speaks to the
potential of crowdfunding as a tool to leverage peoples relationships, feeling and emotions in order
to provide funds for various causes. By leveraging the power of the crowd, nonprofits and causes
can exponentially broaden their base of supporters and donors at a minimal cost, and develop a
sense of community and commitment around their social enterprises. DoGood will exploit this
growing potential.
Five Forces Analysis

Below is a snapshot of a Five Forces analysis for DoGood.
Figure 5: Five Forces Snapshot
Despite clearly providing value to nonprofits, in order to thrive in the mobile giving industry as an
application, a high degree of effort will be required to continuously and repeatedly satisfy and
captivate donors. Since the industry is highly fragmented and there are several substitutes for
donating besides through a mobile application DoGood will have to successfully market the four key
compelling competitive advantages that differentiate them from the competition.
Suppliers
Individual Donors
Individual donors choose causes, supply capital through the platform, and represent a significant
influence over the business model. The challenge any mobile giving service will have to overcome is
that this constituent can undoubtedly find other ways to donate either on their own accord or by
other methods of mobile solicitation. This places a great deal of supplier power in the hands of the
users, and their utilization or willingness to pay for the service will be highly dependent not only on
ease of use, but also on the attractiveness and relevance of opportunities presented via the platform.
Therefore, the degree to which users engage with the platform depends highly on the whether a
satisfactory number of campaigns on the application resonate with them. There will be little
incentive for them to continue using the service if the campaigns are uninspiring. With very low
initial switching costs there is little to deter users from abandoning use of DoGood. Individual
donors have significant supplying power because many options exist for people to donate to charity.
Additionally, each person has individual preferences that the application will need to satisfy.
Buyers
Cause Organizations
Cause organizations serve as the buyer for the mobile giving industry by purchasing access to the
donor pool and mobile phone marketing channel. Mobile giving platforms offer a new distribution
channel to organizations for cause marketing directly into the hands of consumers, particularly
through push notifications. Cause organizations do not have significant buying power because they
are a highly fragmented industry with millions of potential suppliers of causes to mobile giving
platforms. Supplying power does increase with the size of the cause organization, however, as they
can bring crucial users from their donor database into the DoGood user pool.
Businesses
Companies are an important and decisive set of secondary buyers for the mobile donation industry.
Companies are in need of finding efficient marketing mechanisms to engage and advertise their CSR
programs. Some studies have shown that poor communication is seen as a lack of social
engagement. However, companies have many different options in order to promote their social
initiatives, but very few of those options offer a higher ratio of targeted audiences vs. marketing
expenditures than mobile donation applications. In general, the buying power of companies in
regards to the usage of a mobile donation platform is high/moderate, however it would decrease
substantially in relationship to increases in the amount of users and other corporate businesses
actively using the platform.
Businesses also provide scarce resources such as funding, brand equity and a sense of greater trust
and transparency to the donation process. Many well-known companies that sponsor donation
campaigns give recognition to both the cause and the donation mechanism, and the public sees
corporate partnerships as a check and balance system that ensures the money collected effectively
reaches the benefactor.
Competitors and Substitutes
Many competitors exist in the online and mobile giving market. Each aim to own a majority of
market share; however, only one competitor, mGive, has accumulated a dominant position with text
to give. Since there are many offerings available for buyers and suppliers, competitor and substitute
power is low.
mGive/Mobile Giving Foundation- Text to Give

Mobile Accord / mGive has raised more than 85% of all funds raised to date through the mobile
giving channel.36 mGive works with over two hundred nonprofit clients, many of which are top
charities.37 The Mobile Giving Foundation (MGF) serves as the glue between a charitable giving
campaign, the wireless industry and the 250M wireless users in the United States.38 MGFs
messaging platform is used by wireless carriers through their SMS centers to allow people to
donate quickly and directly to a cause.39 The wireless carriers pass 100% of the charitable funds
they collect through to MGF. The MGF also remits 100% of the donation to the recipient nonprofit
within 30 days of receiving funds from the wireless carriers. The MGF charges back costs for shortcode costs, reporting and messaging charges directly to the nonprofit organizations or their
supporting service providers on a post-donation basis.40
In order for a charity or organization to be able to use mGive, they must be a 501(c)(3), have annual
revenues of at least $550K annually and must have been in existence for at least one year.
Donations can be made in the amounts of $5 or $10. Each mobile carrier has restrictions on the
total monthly amount that can be donated. For example, in AT&T's case, The limit for giving ... is
five times per month for $5 donations, and three times per month for $10 donations, or a total of
$55 provided that $55 doesnt put you over the overall $100 premium content limit, said Steven
Schwadron, an AT&T spokesman. Premium content is what wireless carriers call extra add-ons
like ring tones or music, and for now, mobile donations fall into that sphere.41
Mobile Cause- Mobile Giving Platform and Services
Mobile Cause is a platform that enables users to design multiple types of online and mobile
donation offerings. Offerings include text to give, mobile donations, mobile marketing, event
donations and fundraising thermometers, social giving, donor records and data, mobile verification
and subscriptions, a call center to receive donations and consulting. Users must be registered
501(c)(3) organizations. Pricing varies by the type of features desired, but is billed on a monthly
basis.
Mobile Cause promotes several giving statistics that are specific to their platform. The average
credit or debit text donation at events is $167. They boast a credit or debit donation fulfillment rate
of 84% and a 58% completion rate for text to give donations. 51% of all platform donations are
given via their call center verses 49% via text link.42
Give Easy- Not for Profit Mobile Giving Application
Give Easy is an Australian not-for-profit mobile giving application that is free for users to download
and free for charities to sign up and use. Users who make a donation are charged a 5.5% fee for all
credit card transactions. Any surplus funds are channeled back to the charity sector. Currently,
users can only donate to charities residing in Australia. The applications functionality is the same
as The Giving App.
The Giving App- For Profit Mobile Giving Application
The Giving App is customized mobile application built for an organization. Donors use the
application on their mobile device to donate money quickly and easily. The target audience is
smaller charities or organizations that do not have national brand recognition and are focused on
local giving such as churches, nonprofits and other organizations wanting a modern and
convenient way for donors to engage in digital giving.43 The Giving App is positioned as an
alternative way to collect donations from a user base. It is not necessarily meant to replace other
means of collecting donations, but to be used at live events or when people want to give quickly and
easily. Users only need to have a bankcard to donate. Pricing is based on a monthly and per
transaction basis: $19/month for 300 members, $49/month for 300-2000 members and
$99/month for 2000-10000 members. Donation transaction fees are 2.9% plus $.29 cents per
bankcard transaction.44
Figure 6: Competitors and Substitutes
New Entrants
Hurdles for entering the mobile giving sector are very low. Building an application for any mobile
device is inexpensive to create and make available to the consumer. A simple search for a donation
application produces hundreds of opportunities to give to any number of causes. What separates
one application from another, or what barriers exist to becoming a successful application? The
biggest barrier is network effects, building a user base that can create momentum for a product to
attract both nonprofits and their contributors. For this reason, the second barrier to entry is
creating an association with a large and powerful nonprofit such as the Red Cross or the Jimmy fund
that can provide a substantial user base. In the past 40 years, over 200,000 nonprofit organizations
have been formed, but only 144 have reached over $50M in revenue.45 Due to the small number of
successful nonprofits, partnerships that could produce immediate network, support and credibility
to a mobile application are limited.
SWOT Analysis
DoGood has a unique set of challenges and opportunities. The mobile application market is a
booming industry. With over 300 mobile applications being created every day46, the market is
extremely saturated and shows little sign of slowing down. One reason for excessive development is
the extremely low cost to create a mobile application and a still relatively unpredictable model for
what makes an application successful. The assessment of the position of DoGood going into this
crowded market is based on strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis
that considered direct competitors as well as behavioral trends of the target audiences. While the
mobile giving industry was a focus, the mobile application industry as a whole was also considered,
specifically looking at governmental regulations and ways to differentiate and create value for both
buyers and suppliers.
Strengths
DoGood has strengths that are grouped into two categories. One category is strengths associated
with the mobile application industry, such as low marginal cost, ability to utilize network effects for
rapid growth, and variable costs model. The second category looks at differentiating attributes that
provides DoGood an advantage over other applications in this space. One significant advantage is
the implementation of a much broader platform of web services for all users. This allows
customization by individuals, companies and nonprofits to realize benefits specific to their needs
and appeal to a much broader market than a typical application. Additionally, the multipurpose
platform allows people to build a customized profile and receive tailored messages and
opportunities. Personalized profiles increase switching costs for users who do not want to go
through the process of reiterating this information in multiple programs.
Weaknesses
Creating customer loyalty is essential in an industry where switching costs and customer loyalty are
typically quite low - a weakness inherent to the mobile application industry. Another weakness is
the difficulty of creating an effective marketing campaign that can break through the noise of so
many choices and feature the differentiating characteristics of DoGood. Specific to DoGood is the
challenge of providing evidence that their application is offering a benefit that will attract the
customer base to build their donor network, despite being a new entrant without a an existing
customer base. Though DoGood is working to establish relationships with large, recognizable
nonprofits and businesses that can boost network effects, the mobile donation industry is
characterized by operating under a small margin profit model.
Opportunities
The mobile giving market is rapidly
The already secured alliances with large
growing
as individuals are looking for a
organizations like the Jimmy Fund and Bertuccis
simple way to participate in worthy causes
provide a strong opportunity for DoGood. These
in a cost conscious economy.
organizations add credibility and offer marketing
presence to a broader market as well as the
possibility of an immediate and substantial user base. The mobile giving market is rapidly growing
as individuals are looking for a simple way to participate in worthy causes in a cost conscious
economy. Many organizations with reputations for effectively addressing human needs often do not
have the resources to solicit small donations. Through these partnerships, DoGood reduces this cost,
increases the value of micro-donations, and opens this opportunity for both the organization and
the individual to work together. In addition, corporate sponsors looking to increase exposure of
their CSR will have the opportunity to engage with individuals as they support cause organizations
through this application.
Threats
DoGood has the ability to lower the participation cost for nonprofits, businesses, and individuals to
work together, but this application will not be the only offering in this arena. Mobile platforms with
established networks are also working on developing mobile giving applications. The first and
greatest threat is ensuring the security of information being shared. Not only is personal
information being shared by donors, but also sensitive financial information. Currently the model to
funnel these payments through mobile phone bills has protected against the liability of soliciting, or
hosting a large database of personal credit information. However, this model impacts the operating
costs and the benefit to the cause organization. Similarly, the increase in fraudulent organizations
and activity is a concern of any consumer who is contributing to online causes. It is becoming
harder to verify information on the Internet and scams create doubt and suspicion among wellintended individuals. Fraudulent online activity encourages government intervention and
regulation that can also greatly impact the low margins of the mobile giving industry. Lastly, patents
or intellectual property rights must be considered for any technology company.
In spite of these challenges, DoGood is well positioned to address these threats and weaknesses. By
leveraging key strengths, DoGood will capitalize on the market opportunities and thrive. Success
largely resides in creating a user experience that will add value to individuals wanting to support
local and global causes; support the marketing efforts of nonprofits with limited resources to
expand the contributor base; and expose the corporate social responsibility initiatives of charitable
companies.
Figure 7: SWOT Analysis Summary
Strengths
Part of a wider ecosystem of design, marketing and
data analysis software
Potential for customization and tailored- made
advertisement
High switching costs for nonprofit users of the
system
Mobile access
Low marginal cost for adding extra users
Easily scalable
Low fixed costs
Network effects, crowd and behavioral effects
Cost efficient marketing tool
Experienced executive team
Opportunities
Strategic alliances with nonprofit organizations to
get a substantial initial users base
Strategic alliances with corporations with existing
customer databases to market their CSR projects
Positive first impression generates a lot of buzz and
word of mouth
Becoming more than an app but a DoGood
movement
Possibility of posting/including the DoGood
donation module in third parties web pages and
apps
Development of push proximity notifications
Growing market with few significant competitors
Increased use of mobile devices
Increased participate in global cause funding
through micro-donation model
Weaknesses
Dependence on network effects with low
consumer loyalty in the mobile giving industry
High initial upfront investment for specific assets
with very low recoverable or salvage value
Early stage of development and experimenting
with demands/supply reaction to prices and
initiatives
Relatively small margin industry
Securing substantial IP rights to mobile
applications is complicated
Lack of web/tech designer on executive team
Threats
Cyber-security challenges
Support of fraudulent causes or facilitation of
money laundering
Very diverse social media apps, (Facebook,
Tweeter) entering the donation market segment
Changes in Regulation of Online donations and
payments
Replications of differentiated features (Push
notification) by already established competitors
(mgive)
Economic uncertainty relating to contribution from
corporations
Similar products in the market
Marketing Plan
Objectives
DoGoods mission is to alleviate one of the greatest challenges all nonprofits face. This is the
constant pressure to fundraise more efficiently and effectively, so that the maximum amount of
funds donated go to the cause of interest. DoGood plans to address this pain point by creating the
largest community of nonprofits, individual donors, and corporate sponsors. This community will
be able to leverage the power of crowd sourced micro donations for project-based fundraising
campaigns. DoGood plans to create this community of nonprofits, individual donors, and corporate
sponsors through strategic promotional efforts unique to each of the three users. These efforts
include direct sales, digital channels, conferences, trade magazines, and anticipated free PR from
online blogs and local news programs/newspapers.
By executing the outlined marketing plan, in year one DoGood expects to recruit 27 nonprofits from
the target nonprofit market, which will create 56 fundraising campaigns, 50% of which will be
connected with a corporate sponsor. In addition, between both lists of supporters handed over by
nonprofit early adopters, and organic growth tactics, DoGood anticipates it can obtain 481K user
downloads, representing 5% of the target and secondary individual donor markets within the first
year of launch. It is important to note that this is just a user base, and does not represent 5% share
of the financial value of the donation market.
Segmentation
Nonprofits
There are approximately 1.6M non-profit organizations with expenses totaling $1.45T annually.47
Many nonprofits struggle to find new revenue streams in an era of diminishing foundational and
governmental funding. DoGood aims to capture a portion of the expenses in nonprofit budgets by
offering a new and innovative
Figure 8: Nonprofit Segmentation Frame
solution to reaching donors through
mobile phones.
During the first five years of the
venture, it will be important to focus
on developing partnerships with
large nonprofits to bring in users
from their donor pools to promote
network effects on the platform.
While 73% of nonprofits have
expenses under $500,000, our initial
focus will be on the 4% of the 1.6M
reporting public charities that have
expenses higher than $10M, leaving
85.6% of the spending ($1.24T) in
approximately 64,000 organizations.
It is our belief that successful
partnerships with large nonprofits
will entice the smaller players in the
sector (73% of nonprofits have
The target market over years 1-3 represents 26,880 nonprofit

organizations
budgets under $500,000) to join the DoGood ecosystem, even though we are initially focusing on
the large nonprofits.48
Within the market segment of organizations with budgets over $10M, there is significant variance
in revenue models and thus reliance on individual donations. Research shows organizations that
focus on individual donors are more brand focused and have written formalized marketing plans.
Approximately 42% of organizations with budgets over $5M have marketing plans, and thus we are
using 42% for our estimate of organizations with budgets over $10M who also have a formal
marketing plan.49 This leaves approximately $521.30B in expenses at approximately 26,880
organizations.
While these organizations are our target market for the first five years of our venture, we must
understand total overhead and marketing spends to get a more accurate estimation of the total
market value. Our industry analysis showed that 15% of budgets on average go to overhead
($78.20B) and within this overhead qualitative interviews and expert opinion report that 5% is an
accurate estimation towards development and fundraising.50 This leaves a total market value of
$3.91B at 28,880 organizations with budgets over $10M which DoGood can focus on initially in
order to establish positive relationships with top brands in the nonprofit industry, quickly develop
a user base, and prove value to all industry
Figure 9: Donor Segmentation Frame
players for rapid adoption and profitability.
Individual Donor: Segmenta on Frame
Millennials
Individual Donors
(18-34)
Segment
71.7M
Depending on the poll, in the past 12 months,
No
Yes
between 48%-65% of Americans are willing to
25%
75%
Donate
17.9M
53.8M
or have made a small contribution of either
time or money to show their support to
$1-$50
$51-$100
$101+
34%
24%
24%
Gi Size
organizations or causes.51,52 While some of the
18.9M
12.9M
22.6M
social benefits to DoGood may be great enough
Text, Mobile Site,
Facebook
Online
to sway all people, DoGood anticipates the
Applica on
3%
70%
Channel
12%
primary user of the application will be
567K
13.2M
2.3M
Millennials since they are already accustomed
2.6M
Never Been Asked Not Interested/Concerns
Total Target Market =
Individuals
to instantaneous connection and immediate
53%
47%
6.2M
6.9M
6.2M
Secondary Market =
communication within social networks. This
Individuals
segment is very large at 70-80M people of
The target market represents the 2.6M individuals already using
which 75% have indicate they gave a donation
mobile channels, and our secondary market includes 6.2M
in the past year.53 Individuals of any generation
individuals who do not use mobile because they have never been
asked.
who have already donated money or time in
the past year will be a secondary focus. In addition to giving behavior, each of these consumer
groups will be further segmented on average gift size and primary channel used to give. Based on
these parameters our target market represents the 2.6M Millennials already using mobile channels,
with a secondary Millennial target that includes 6.2M individuals who do not use mobile simple
because they have never been formally asked.
Corporate Sponsors
The market of corporations that DoGood will engage and connect nonprofits with for campaign
sponsorships can be segmented by annual revenue and intangible assets. Focusing on these two
factors will allow DoGood to target companies with strong financial positions that have well known
products/brands and that are focused on building/maintaining high brand equity or goodwill. The
upper mid/high range set of companies are identified as primary targets, not only because of
research that
suggests
consumers
expect these
firms to give
back to their
community, but
also because
these
companies will
bring along
recognition and
trustworthiness
to the
campaigns
housed within
the DoGood
application.
Figure 10: Corporation Segmentation Frame
The target market represents the $24B donations from corporations.
Number of Companies
2012
Revenues
>$1B
[$1B, $500M]
<$500M
>$1B
436
9
0
Goodwill
[$1B, $500M]
179
35
7
<$500M
714
428
3,779
Source: Bloomberg, private calculations.
In U.S. there are 659 public companies that fulfill the requirements; have more than $500M in
yearly revenues as well as reported intangible assets of goodwill of more than $500M for the same
period. Such companies have strong cash flows from operations, which are necessary for funding
operational expenses such as marketing and advertising. The companies are also more likely to
have spent funds on brand awareness, reputation, and recognition campaigns. Combined, the target
659 corporations have the following results. (Note: that some of the companies do not report their
marketing expenses as a separate line item in the financials).
Companies
Targeted 659
Adjusted 725
Revenue
Goodwill
$9.7T
$10.7T
$2.7T
$3T
Marketing
Expense
$86.1B
$95B
Market Cap
$15.2T
$16.7T
Since the desired information is only available for public corporations, a 10% adjustment was
applied in order to incorporate private corporations; although in the U.S. a big portion of companies
with the desired characteristic are mostly public, there are some very successful private institution
that will be targeted.
Success in Selling
Nonprofits
DoGood is applying a proven methodology (project based crowdsourced micro-funding) that has
effectively raised funds in other channels and is bringing it to the nonprofit sector in the form of a
mobile application. This game changing fundraising platform will provide a scalable way for
nonprofits of any size to not only raise money regardless of organizational size and marketing
budget, but to also re-engage existing donors as well as efficiently build awareness and find new
donors. On the back end, nonprofits will also have access to performance metrics for all their
campaigns and level of donor engagement in real time.
Individual Donors
DoGood will be one of the easiest and quickest ways for any individual with a smartphone to
contribute to the organizations and causes they care about. A growing trend among American
consumers contributing to social causes is the demand for transparency. Due to the project-based
nature of the campaigns on DoGood, donors will not only understand exactly what their donation is
going towards (rather than to a general fund), but will also be able to track the progress of the
campaign. Lastly, to satisfy the ever increasing desire to share with others on social networks, users
will be able to create their own giving profile that will both track contributions and enable sharing.
Corporate Sponsors
More than 90% of consumers look to companies to support social or environmental issues in some
capacity, and 88% are eager to hear from companies about those efforts.54 DoGood provides an
efficient solution for corporations to connect with national and local cause organizations as well as
participate, publicize, and engage with consumers who want to see corporations supporting worthy
issues. On the back end, sponsoring an event on DoGood will be an effective way to promote a
companys website, social media channels, or retail location all while receiving real time data on the
specific individuals who respond to a companys promotion.
Priced to Optimize Use

Cause organizations will pay for donation collections within DoGood that are not sponsored by a
corporation or co-marketing venture. This price is established primarily to cover expenses of
operations. Corporations that choose to sponsor a nonprofit campaign will receive a different
pricing structure based on the added marketing value provided by the DoGood application and
DoGood community.
Nonprofits
The specific transaction fee charged to nonprofits is based on a value-based pricing model (VBPM),
which was constructed with insights and feedback from survey data, nonprofit leader depth
interviews, and our industry analysis.
Figure 11 details the VBPM for cause organizations. A base cost of 5% was used to represent the
fees (including capitalized estimation of monthly and per donation fees) charged by competitors
currently in the mobile donation market. For example, PayPal charges 2.2% plus $.30 per a
transaction, which equates to a 5.2% for a $10 donation.
Figure 11: Cause Organization Segmentation Frame
Based on a value based pricing model, despite offering more value than our competition DoGood will utilize a
penetration pricing strategy 3% transaction fee instead of the 5% our competitors charge.
Total positive differentiation of DoGood was determined to be 3.5% over competitors. High quality
new donor leads, which lower the cost of new donor acquisition, was estimated as 1% of the
positive differentiation. Leveraging consumers networks for increased marketing impressions and
awareness on campaigns was estimated at .5% of the positive differentiation. The easier access to
businesses for cause marketing, donations (e.g. matching), and co-branding makes 1% of the
positive differentiation. Access to data for analysis makes .5% and the opportunity for two-way
interactions with customers makes the final .5% of the total 3.5% positive differentiation in value
over competitors.
Total negative differentiation in the model is 2.5%. .5% of this value comes from the switching costs
to working within a new application. The loss of exclusivity over donor pool data and the possibility
that their donors will receive pushes from other causes comprises the remaining 2% of the negative
differentiation. This leads to a total of 1% net differentiation over competitors and a total potential
value capture.
Within this 6% of potential value capture based on the VBPM analysis, an aggressive penetration
pricing strategy of 3% (undercutting competitors base price) was selected in order to build market
share and recruit cause organizations for network effects on the DoGood platform. This 3% value is
substantiated by individual donors preferences in survey data and indicated willingness to pay in
depth interviews of nonprofit leaders.
Corporate Sponsors
Businesses will utilize the platform for directed cause marketing and positive brand associations.
They will gain access to a new marketing channel and be able enhance their brand image by co-
branding fundraising initiatives that nonprofits send to their donors. This offers branding
impressions for all potential donors receiving the fundraising notifications in the DoGood
ecosystem. Our pricing for corporate sponsors is based on our VBPM constructed through industry
analysis, depth interview feedback, and survey data.
Figure 12 shows the business VBPM in detail. The base cost is 5%, calculated using comparative
pricing fees for mobile donations analogous to the nonprofit VBPM calculation. The total positive
net differentiation for businesses totals 6%. High quality of new cause-oriented customer leads
accounts for 1% of this value. Leveraging consumer networks for increased marketing impressions
and awareness is estimated at 1%. Easier access to cause organizations for cause marketing and cobranding is estimated at 1%. It is estimated that access to the consumer data for information and
marketing analytics is the most valuable differentiator at 2%. The opportunity for two-way
interactions with customers on the DoGood platform (including coupon offerings) is unique versus
other cause marketing avenues and makes up 1% of the positive differentiation. The negative .5%
differentiation is based on switching costs to a new platform and gives a total net differentiation of
5.5% and total potential 10.5% value capture.
Figure 12: Corporation Segmentation Frame
Based on a value based pricing model, because of the increased value DoGood provides above our competition, an 8%
transaction fee will be charged to organizations instead of the 5% our competitors charge.
Despite a total potential 10.5% value capture, a neutral pricing strategy of only 8% will be used. By
participating in DoGood donation campaigns, businesses will cover the fees for the cause
organizations. Advertisements will be shared with consumers as an incentive to donate, but will
also promote a positive brand association for the company. Businesses will also be able to offer
matching schemes for fundraising campaigns as a donor incentive and branding tool.
Individual Donors
The entire platform will be free to individual donors and mobile phone users. This incentivizes use
by cause-oriented consumers through the opportunity to both receive deals and support causes at
socially responsible businesses. The more users that adopt the system the more network effects will
be created and more businesses and nonprofits will be enticed to enter and grow the DoGood
ecosystem.
Place of Access
Nonprofits and Corporate Sponsors
Businesses and cause organizations will have the opportunity to sign onto and join the DoGood
community via contractual agreement following direct sales meetings/calls or by completing
required documents/application on the DoGood website http://signup.good2gether.com/.
Individual Donors
Individual users can download the application and join the DoGood community via the two most
popular mobile application stores, iTunes App Store and Google Play.
iTunes is the most convenient channel for Apple phone and tablet users to download the DoGood
application. The application can be found either by organic search by name or by browsing the
Lifestyle category. The Google Play store is the most convenient channel for Google Android users
to download the DoGood application for any Android device. Similar to iTunes, users can search
organically for the application by name or by browsing within the Life Style by category.
If the application is downloaded at a high enough volume it can also potentially become featured on
the Top New Releases page or other top charts on the front page of each respective application
store. Furthermore, for both these channels, the applications rating (on a 5 star scale) is one of the
most important factors influencing its ranking in the various lists and search results, and is one of
the key signals that the editorial staff looks for before promoting it as an Editors Choice.
The DoGood website will also have a link that funnels users directly to the DoGood application page
within the iTunes store or Google Play store. The DoGood application page will feature a
description of the application, screen shots, information, and reviews.
Unique Promotion
Two unique promotional approaches will be necessary to effectively reach the three segments that
have been identified in this marketing plan - nonprofits, individual and corporations. See Appendix
E for year one monthly breakdown of promotions.
Engaging Nonprofits and Corporations
A major selling point of DoGood as a donation collection tool is the ability to co-brand the nonprofit
and the corporation to a specific target market; the nonprofit needs to partner with a corporation to
help fund their efforts and the corporation wants improved awareness of their support within the
community. Therefore, corporations and nonprofits will be approached from the same promotional
perspective of the power of co-branding.
An important channel for promotion will be via a direct sales force. Both nonprofits and
corporations have a vested interest in mutual support, but have little resources to commit to
developing that relationship. DoGoods sales force will add value to both organizations by
simplifying this process. Though this is a labor-intensive process in the beginning for DoGood, it is
essential to develop the relationships necessary for continued growth and to demonstrate the
benefit of the product for each party. The primary focus will be on large nonprofits and companies
that have existing relationships with them to initially build the user base. As the number of
participants grows, network effects will simplify this process as smaller organizations will seek
opportunities to participate, allowing DoGood to facilitate more promotions and increase
awareness organically. The sales force will also attempt to find leads by attending trade conferences
(e.g. Annual Association of Fundraising Professionals, representing 30,000 members, Cause
Marketing Forum, etc.), searching the LinkedIn enterprise database for professionals responsible
for their organizations development and fundraising, as well as advertising on the professional
network.
To generate initial buzz among nonprofit and CSR managers, DoGood will deliver press releases on
digital trade channels such as CSRwire.com (163,000 active users, and over 7,000 organizations),
which DoGood will belong to as a featured member. This entitles DoGood to share content with
CSRwire.coms social network, access to 50 mission driven syndication partners RSS feeds (87
million monthly views), a headline in the features section of CSRwire.coms homepage for five days
and in an e-mail newsletter that is sent to over 50,000 people.
To celebrate and showcase successful campaigns to nonprofit and CSR managers, branded articles
will be written and advertisements will be purchased for publications (e.g. Non Profit Times,
Philanthropy, Giving USA, Contributions Magazine, etc.), which can reach over 200,000 nonprofit
executives. In addition, industry gatekeepers and professional fundraisers with large social
followings and credibility (e.g. Dan Pallotta, Tim Kachuriak, Dan Gillett, etc.) will be asked to review
the application and endorse its effectiveness on their own blogs. The main objective will be to have
these industry leaders link the application to their audiences interests and tie those interests to
current nonprofit obstacles the application can help companies overcome. An endorsement and
support from even one of these industry titans will not only further increase credibility for DoGood,
but will also create a competitive advantage.
Engaging the Individual User
Creating awareness among individuals will happen initially through our association with nonprofits
and companies that individuals already support. These organizations will send an invitation to their
database of supporters to download DoGood as a way to simplify their ability to continue to support
the organizations they are passionate about. The nature of the mobile application industry, however,
requires constant improvement and change to engage a market that is extremely fluid and shows a
low attention span for application interaction. As the size and involvement of this user base is a
primary focus and selling point for nonprofits and corporations, DoGood will provide innovative
tools that create a compelling reason for individuals to participate with this product on an ongoing
basis. These tools rely on a joint effort between DoGood, nonprofits and corporations and builds on
a crowd sourcing model that is successful among mobile users. The nonprofit and corporation will
create a co-branding initiative that DoGood will present in an interactive model, such as mobile
sharing, that allows individuals the ability to customize and control their level of interaction and
encourages them to invite others to join in the DoGood ecosystem.
Another important promotional tactic used will be communication and messaging through social
media platforms. By promoting successful campaigns, news, best practices, and even customer
service through Twitter and Facebook, DoGood will create a positive brand image, continue to ramp
up awareness, keep the service top of mind, and add validity to the benefit of the product. DoGood
will also have a search engine optimized website that features past fundraising results, how to
videos (also hosted on YouTube), client testimonials, and a blog on best practices.
Lastly, organic growth will be accomplished through a sharing tactic called Mobile share. This
feature allows individuals to share their charitable efforts with others, as well as inviting others to
join them. DoGood will allow individuals to customize pitches as to why they participated in a
particular cause and encourage others to join them in tracking that cause in their journey to the end
goal. DoGood will sponsor four major events throughout the year that encourage individual users to
support a cause and then campaign for that cause to their friends. The four causes will feature four
different organizational interests - Human need, Animal intervention, Environmental support, and
Local organization.
Operations Plan
In order for DoGood to be successful, it will need to provide a superior user experience for both
individual donors and the organizations that will sponsor causes on the DoGood platform. To
accomplish this, Good2Gether, Inc., will need to focus on software delivery for multiple hardware
devices (Apple and Android) and technology support and maintenance.
Location for Innovation

Good2Gethers operations are located at WorkBar, 45 Prospect Street, Cambridge, MA 02139.
WorkBar has turned the office concept into a membership-based workplace open to people serious
about their work and hungry for the energetic hum of collaborative productivity.55 WorkBar is a
network of shared, coworking office spaces...Made up of thriving start-ups, creative entrepreneurs,
independent professionals and enterprise teams, the interactive atmosphere of Workbar...
(provides) access to all of the resources...(a) business needs to grow.56 WorkBar is professionally
managed and offers office amenities including wifi, conference rooms, event space and a full kitchen
with free coffee and snacks.
WorkBar is the ideal location for Good2Gethers operations as the site offers the company an
opportunity to expand it office space and square footage rapidly. In addition, WorkBars location in
Central Square in Cambridge, Massachusetts is a hub for technology-focused startups. Pricing at
WorkBar is done by membership level. Three levels exist and Good2Gether will take advantage of
the most robust offering. This includes a furnished office, four full WorkBar memberships, a
lockable private room, unlimited meeting and phone room space, 24/7 access to the location, and
access to other WorkBar locations during normal business hours when traveling.
Equipment and Technology Utilization

Specific equipment required to run Good2Gethers operations is limited. Each WorkBar
membership includes free office supplies, color and black and white printing, projectors, mail
services, drinks and snacks. Good2Gether will be utilizing Googles Cloud Platform to host its mobile
application. Google uses a freemium model for its cloud hosting services and Good2Gether will be
subscribing to its premier level. Google Cloud Platform provides cloud computing services that
allow you to build applications and websites, store data and analyze data on Googles
infrastructure.57 We estimate that Good2Gethers monthly hosting and server expenses will be
$4,106 and increase to $14,446 in 2014. By 2018, hosting and server expenses will exceed $2.5
million.
The Right Labor Mix

Good2Gether requires three specific skill sets in order to support its operations. First, the company
will require a technology staff that has extensive experience in building and maintaining mobile
application software, as well as server and hosting expertise. Second, the company will require a
sales and business development staff to support the companys growth efforts. These employees
will need to be well networked in both the nonprofit, charity, and private sectors. In addition, a
team will need to be dedicated to new mobile application user acquisition via advertising and social
media. This will be housed within the marketing functions of the business. Finally, the company will
require a team dedicated to customer support and maintaining existing business relationships. Due
to the strong competition in the mobile application sector, a flawless customer service experience
will be as important as application design and technology to distinguish DoGood from its
competitors.
Overhead
Overhead consists of several expenses for Good2Gether. First, rent for space at the WorkBar is
based on square footage. Good2Gether will incur a monthly rent expense of $6,413 in 2014.
Monthly rent expense will increase to $8,438 in 2015 and then will increase by approximately 5%
in years 2016-2018.
Second, Good2Gether will outsource its accounting functions to a third party vendor. Good2Gether
will employ the services of Ignite Spot, which offer bookkeeping, tax services and CFO services.
Since Good2Gether will not hire a Chief Financial Officer (CFO) in its initial years of business, Ignite
Spots service portfolio matches the needs of Good2Gethers early financial management needs. We
expect monthly accounting vendor expenses to be between $3,000 and $3,200 through 2018.
Next, Good2Gether will be outsourcing its legal needs as well to Pangea3. Pangea3 offers litigation,
intellectual property, and risk management and compliance solutions to its clients. We estimate
monthly legal expenses to be $5,000 in 2014, $8,000 in 2015, and between $9,000 and $9,500 in
2016-2018.
Good2Gether has budgeted for travel and accommodation expenses to grow as the business grows.
These expenses will primarily originate from the sales department as the team travels the country
to acquire new business and nonprofit clients. Travel expenses are expected to grow from
approximately $25,000 in 2014 to $75,000 in 2016. At that point, we project Good2Gether will have
acquired a critical mass in terms of cause organizations and businesses supporting the platform.
Therefore, we expect travel expenses to grow only minimally in 2017 and 2018.
Good2Gether will acquire several types of commercial insurance to protect the business and its
operations. Insurance policies will include 1) commercial liability insurance, which will cover
claims against the business from third parties; 2) fidelity insurance, which will protect the business
from theft; 3) and business interruption insurance, which will cover losses or damage that could
occur if the business is forced to cease operations. We expect insurance premiums to cost $30,000
in 2014, $60,000 in 2015, and between approximately $72,000 and $77,000 in 2016-2018.
Finally, there is some variability in Good2Gethers sales growth and expected expenses since the
company is newly formed. For this reason, we have taken a conservative approach to forecasting
our Other G&A expenses. Although WorkBar membership includes most resources required to
support day-to-day operations and we have estimated salaries, insurance, accounting and legal fees,
we have included Other G&A to support any unexpected variance in our expenses. For Other G&A,
we have estimated $48,000 in 2014, $60,000 in 2015 and between approximately $72,000 and
$77,000 in 2016-2018.
Flow of Orders
The transaction flow for a DoGood mobile application user is illustrated below. The process to
donate is self-guided and easy to understand. Once the user has downloaded the DoGood
application, they create a user profile that includes demographic information, credit or debit card
information for donations, and charity or cause type preferences. The preferences will determine
the push notifications they receive. Once the profile is created, the DoGood mobile application
presents a series of causes and organizations that align with the users profile. Once the user selects
a cause, they are able to review who the organization is and how their donation will be used to
support the cause. The user then selects the value of their donation.
At this point in the process, there is a key distinction between Apple and Android phone users.
Apple has banned charitable donations made through applications on its iOS
platform...Applications can suggest that users donate, and can direct them to the nonprofits
website, but cannot explicitly say anywhere in the application or its description that some or all
proceeds will go to charity.58 For these reasons, Apple users will be redirected to their phones
mobile browser and Android users will complete their donation directly in the DoGood application.
A transaction fee will be charged by the DoGood application or browser and the donation will be
sent to the charity.
Figure 13: Mobile Application Donation Order Flow
Order Flow only alters for Apple or Android phone users when it comes time to make the donation. Due to Apple policy, all
charity donations must be made through a web browser rather than an application.
Organizational Plan
The organizational plan captures key foundational aspects of Good2Gether including the companys
legal structure, leadership, and roles and responsibilities. Employee expertise, functional skills, and
satisfaction are vital to the success of Good2Gether and DoGood. Therefore, Good2Gether places a
high importance on acquiring a diverse staff and retaining them through a strong company culture.
Flexible Legal Structure

Good2Gether, Inc., was established as a C Corporation. While more expensive to establish because
of filing fees, as a C-corporation, Good2Gether is a separate taxable entity. Therefore, the companys
earnings and losses are taxed at the entity level, and the personal liability to the founders is
reduced. Structuring Good2Gether this way provides significant flexibility regarding who can be a
stockholder in the company. Also, because Good2Gether is a tech start-up looking for financing from
angel funding and venture capitalist, a C-corporation is the most desirable to those potential
investors due to various administrative and tax issues.
Good2Gether is a Delaware corporation. Delaware was selected because of its flexible corporate
laws and favorable tax treatment for businesses headquartered in other states.
Principal Shareholders
Gregory McHale founded Good2Gether in 2007 in Melrose, MA, with $1.5M in angel funding. Greg
has raised an additional $1.5M in angel funding since 2008. He has also received investments from
Najafi Companies, a Phoenix-based private equity firm. Greg remains the majority shareholder in
Good2Gether.
The Management Team

Brian Leamy Chief Executive Officer
Brian possesses an extensive background in technology solutions enabling charitable giving. Brian
was the Executive in Charge of mGive, the leader in Short Message Service (SMS) mobile giving for
US charities. Previously, Brian worked to build global online donation processing and volunteering
solutions for United Way Worldwide. He also worked at Deloitte Consulting for seven years
delivering technology and strategy solutions for diverse clients. Brian holds an MBA from the
University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School, and three degrees from the Stevens Institute of
Technology.
Gregory McHale VP of Business Development (Founder and Chief Good Officer)
Greg possesses a background in technology and over twenty years of sales, marketing and general
management experience. He has spent the last twelve years of his career starting companies. At
Virtual Ink he led a student team from MIT and created a company that raised over $88M in venture
capital funding that established a brand new product category portable electronic whiteboards.
Previously, Greg founded cMarket in 2001. cMarket revolutionized the $18B per year nonprofit
auction market by delivering a web-based tool that enabled nonprofit organizations to better
manage and market their charity auctions.
Ashish Khan - Chief Technology Officer

Ashish recently joined Good2Gether. Prior to joining the team, Ashish worked at Digitas as a Senior
Vice President/Group Director. During his twenty-year career, he has managed a wide variety of
engagements from strategic planning, building CRM and e-Business platforms as well as building
point solutions to enable successful marketing campaigns and customer facing capabilities. Ashish
has worked with senior management of leading customer centric brands such as American Express,
AT&T, Allstate, Aetna, Coca Cola, Fidelity Investments, GM, IBM, Intercontinental Hotels Group,
Intel, L.L.Bean, Motorola, Morgan Stanley, Neiman Marcus, Pfizer, Shell Oil, Starwood and others.
Vacant Chief Sales and Marketing Officer
The Chief Sales and Marketing Officer position is currently vacant. Good2Gether is scouring the
globe for the best talent to fill this position. The ideal candidate will possess over 20 years of sales
and marketing leadership experience within the technology industry. As this role will likely be split
into two roles as the company grows Chief Sales Officer and Chief Marketing Officer, significant
sales experience will be the priority for applicants.
Figure 14: Organizational Chart
Chief Executive
Officer
* Not onboard until Q1, 2015

** 50% utilization until Q1, 2015
Executive
Assistant
Controller
**Human
Resources
Director
VP of Business
Development
*Director of
Product Design
Strategic
Business
Manager
Chief
Technology
Officer
Development
Director
Chief Sales and

Marketing
Officer
Director of
Sales
Director of
Major Accounts
Development
Engineer
Regional Sales
Manager
Development
Engineer
Regional Sales
Manager
Director of
Marketing
Sales Support
Specialist
Customer
Support
Specialist
Four key functions have been identified as part of the Organizational hierarchy: Controller, Business Development, Technology and
Sales and Marketing.
Roles and Responsibilities of Members of the Organization

Positions in the organization will increase over time. The organizational chart provided above is
reflective of plans for 2014. Additional Development Engineers, Sales Managers, Sales Support
Specialists, Customer Support Specialists, and Marketing Managers will be hired as the company
grows. Additional staff is accounted for in the financial statements. General roles and
responsibilities for all positions in the current organizational chart are below.
Chief Executive Officer Provides daily oversight to Good2Gether and is accountable for the
strategic direction and overall success of the company.
Executive Assistant Provides scheduling support to the CEO and assumes select officer manager
duties (Good2Gether will hire an office manager position in the future) such as ordering supplies
and company file maintenance.
Controller Responsible for overall budget management and ensures accurate and compliant
reporting (Good2Gether will hire a CFO position in the future).
Human Resources Director Identifies, vets, and/or interviews potential Good2Gether employee
candidates and oversees the employee benefit program.
VP Business Development Guides the companys strategy around new business ventures and new
strategic partners.
Director of Product Design Responsible for DoGood application design and user experience
modifications; feeds requirements to the technology team.
Strategic Business Manager Supports the VP Business Development in identifying new business
opportunities and acquiring new strategic partners.
Chief Technology Officer Accountable for implementation of all DoGood application requirements
to include overseeing coding and developing the application/implementing enhancements.
Development Director Supports the Chief Technology Officer and leads a team of development
engineers in building and enhancing the DoGood application.
Development Engineer Codes the DoGood application.
Chief Sales and Marketing Officer Accountable for acquiring new customers (both nonprofits and
businesses) for the DoGood application and marketing to the target customers.
Director of Sales Responsible for working with the Director of Marketing to define a strategy for
sales targets and oversees a team of sales managers.
Director of Major Accounts Responsible for building and maintaining relationships with key
national nonprofits and businesses that are over a specific size.
Regional Sales Manager Supports the Director of Sales in implementing the sales strategy; each
sales manager is assigned to a region and is accountable for sales in that region.
Sales Support Supports the sales staff with administrative tasks related to sales such as paperwork
and follow-up communication.
Customer Support Supports customers by answering questions, retrieving data/stats specific to
their accounts, and ensuring a positive customer experience.
Director of Marketing Defines the marketing strategy with the Chief Sales and Marketing Officer
and executes the overall marketing strategy to promote DoGood to the target market.
Board of Advisors
Mobile Payment Technology Representative This board member will possess significant
experience in mobile payment technology. They will be able to advise Good2Gether on different
platforms, competitors, consumer behavior, and operations as it relates to mobile payments. This
expertise will help Good2Gether navigate through laws and regulations and functionality
enhancements.
Marketing Expert This board member will possess significant expertise in marketing strategy,
implementation, and leadership. They will possess specific experience marketing to non-profits.
They will be able to advise Good2Gether on marketing campaign development and execution. This
expertise will help Good2Gether develop marketing campaigns that are streamlined, targeted, and
reach nonprofits.
Fundraising Consultant This board member will possess significant expertise in fundraising.
They will be able to advise Good2Gether on fundraising functionality that should be offered through
the DoGood application that would resonate with non-profits. This expertise will help Good2Gether
develop and implement functionality that will efficiently help nonprofits raise funds using relevant
engagement techniques.
Non-Profit Organization Representative This board member will possess significant experience
leading nonprofit organizations. They will be able to advise Good2Gether on the needs and desires
of nonprofits and provide insights from the perspective of the nonprofits. This expertise will help
Good2Gether understand a nonprofits decision-making process and what would make them more
likely to use DoGood.
Corporate Social Responsibility Representative This board member will possess significant
experience managing a successful CSR program for a large national or international corporation.
They will be able to advise Good2Gether on the mindset of a corporation, the motivations for
corporate social responsibility initiatives, and successful CSR marketing strategies. This expertise
will help Good2Gether understand the needs of business and how to target marketing in order to
acquire new business customers and get them to partner with nonprofits.
Good2Gethers Company Culture

Good2Gether prides itself on being an innovative and mission-driven, but casual company. To
channel this to staff, Good2Gether offers performance incentives, good benefits, and a casual dress
policy. The Good2Gether team works out of the Workbar in Cambridge, which is an open and
collaborative space shared with other start-ups. This translates to staff that work very hard, but
play hard, too. Open communication and collaboration are needed for the success of DoGood and
are important characteristics of any potential Good2Gether employee.
Performance Incentives Staff are eligible to receive a performance-based bonus each year ranging
from 10%-30% of their salary (percentage varies by position) as well as stock options.
Benefits Full-time staff receive medical and dental benefits. Employees will pay a small portion
that varies by plan and is taken directly from their salary. Employees also have the option to
participate in a 401k plan. Funds are automatically deducted from the employee's paycheck.
Dress code Staff are allowed to wear the attire that will allow them to perform their job while
being comfortable. In other words, except for specific meetings and situations, suits and business
casual are not required. Outside of specific items of apparel that Good2Gether deems inappropriate
in the employee handbook, employees have the freedom to decide what they wear to the office.
Risk Assessment
Several internal and external risks could potentially impact Good2Gethers success. An Enterprise
Risk Management framework has been applied to consider an appropriate response to each risk to
include avoidance, reduction, alternative action, share or insure, or accept. A risk inventory
identified the following probable concerns.
Accounting for Risks - Inventory and Action

External Risks
Changes in consumer behavior- Decrease in likelihood of using mobile devices for payments.
Alternative Action
Laws and regulations- With the increase in regulation over financial institutions and the
growing use of mobile devices, laws will inevitably be enacted to regulate and control basic
standards of operation. Share or insure
Platform regulations- Restrictions placed on application development from companies such as
Apple. Accept
Economic downturn or recession- Impact on the amount of individual and company giving and
the ability to support cause organizations. Share or insure
Competition- Numerous independent applications as well as larger organizations like Facebook
and Google are providing opportunities to support cause organizations through their sites.
Accept
Internal Risks
Lack of differentiation-Resulting in a standards war in a low margin industry. Reduction
Low adoption rate- The low margin industry of mobile giving relies on quantity and the success
of the plan is depended on the rapid growth of network effects. Alternative Action
Nonprofit engagement- To foster user growth, DoGood is courting large organizations to seed
their client base and attract smaller cause organizations, and corporations. Nonprofits not
willing to share this user base would slow the growth model. Reduction
System failure- Inability to deliver promised services in a simple and engaging manner.
Avoidance
Malware or virus- Real or imagined, the stigma of a system disruption will reduce trust and user
interaction. Avoidance
Cyber Attack- With a high quantity of funds being processed through the site they are a target
for personal identity theft. Avoidance
Fraudulent causes and accounts- Risk lowering trust and puts DoGood at risk of litigation.
Reduction, Share and insure.
Identified risks were ranked on a two by two matrix that assessed the probability of the risk event
against the overall impact on the success of the company to prioritize the risk concern (see Figure
15 below).
Regulation
From this assessment, laws and regulation stand out as a highly likely event that could have a
significant impact on our business plan. Much of this risk is shared with the nonprofits and
corporate entities that are actively engaged in supporting regulation and mediating unpredicted
changes. DoGood can lend support to these organizations in defending their position to mediate
lawmakers to support regulation that favors the sustainability of the nonprofit mobile donor model.
To anticipate regulation around security compliance, DoGood has adopted an aggressive approach
to implementing a high standard of compliance on current regulation through PCI DSS and
individual state regulations and will invest in security management to anticipate future concerns.
In addition DoGood has a simple transparency policy to encourage trust among users.
Cyber
The security management plan will encompass the identified second greatest set of risks including
cyber-attack, malware or virus, and system failure. An avoidance approach to these risks include
extensive testing and security checks to ensure an environment that will reduce DoGoods exposure
to this risk and increase the confidence of consumers. DoGood does share some of this risk in that a
portion of their revenue will be processed through SMS vendors and does not require users to
provide credit card information that would need to be secured. However, as the platform is
developed and in an effort to provide more flexibility to DoGood users, a high level of security will
be included in the original platform.
Market
Another set of risks that are interrelated include the high probability of competition and a low
adoption rate as a result. DoGood accepts competition as a sign of a good market place for growth
and created a highly differentiated product to attract users. DoGood works aggressively to qualify
relevant nonprofits and create programs that are mutually beneficial if information is shared. This
will ideally reduce the risk of associating with nonprofits that do not see the benefit in engaging
their current client base through DoGood. Should adoption show a slower growth rate than
expected, DoGood has the opportunity to increase their promotional budget to not rely solely on the
nonprofit donor base for growth. In addition, the DoGood application has other features for
engaging end users and encouraging them to contribute to the growth of the user base through
individual campaign sharing and promotion. This will help mediate the risk of low nonprofits
engagement.
To ensure that DoGood builds trust among companies, and nonprofits, accounts will be qualified
and verified to reduce the risk of participating with fraudulent accounts either nonprofit or
corporation. This risk is also shared with mobile providers as texted donations flow through their
accounts.
Consumer
Changes in economic conditions and consumer behavior are the final unaddressed risks. These
were identified as having a relatively low impact on the business model in that research has shown
that though corporate giving fell off during the recent economic downturn, individual giving
remained fairly constant. Additionally, the business plan is sustainable without corporate partners.
Recent evidence also shows that consumer behavior is changing in favor of Mobile giving.
Long-Term Sustainability
The sustainability of our business plan is strengthened by the mobile industry adoption rates for
smartphones and trends in mobile giving illustrated in our industry analysis. As smart phones
continue to become ubiquitous and users become more comfortable with mobile monetary
transactions, the market opportunity for DoGood will scale accordingly. As a software product,
DoGood is also easily adaptable to any hardware changes in the mobile industry (e.g., GoogleGlass,
Samsung Watch, etc.). Trends in individual giving continue to scale with growth of U.S. GDP and
DoGood is well positioned for long-term growth and sustainability, which scales with charitable
giving.
In addition to industry trends, cultural shifts towards corporate social responsibility and consumers
seeking a social return on investment will help grow DoGoods value to businesses. As businesses
seek to develop their brand towards more socially conscious consumers, DoGood will be the ideal
channel for reaching cause-oriented consumers. This provides the opportunity to become the
standard and scale with this increased demand. The development of big data and analytics will also
entice corporations and nonprofits alike to harness the power of data created from DoGood user
pool.
The continuing trend towards social media and two-way customer interactions will also help
solidify long-term prosperity. As a first-mover, DoGood has the opportunity to develop an
ecosystem between customers, nonprofits, and businesses, which will benefit from network effects
as it grows. Additionally, DoGood will be able to reach the long-tail of demand for smaller
nonprofits and businesses with its extremely low variable costs and value of increasing the network
size with new users.
The DoGood platform will evolve with new features and modules, which will increase value and
usage rates across all stakeholders in the years to come. Here is a list of potential DoGood additions
to increase the utility of the platform:
Volunteer crowdsourcing to match nonprofits and volunteers through mobile phones.
Video functionality for personal video sharing for nonprofit asks, corporate branding, and
individual social media sharing.
Gamification of donations and doing good in the community to form DoGood teams
competing and sharing for causes.
Expansion of corporate and nonprofit cause marketing partnerships and deals at local
establishments.
Extended cause-marketing offerings and coupons from businesses to consumers.
Customization and development of user experience to better interface with social media.
Deeper big data analytics, and easy to use enterprise dashboards
Ultimately, favorable industry trends and evolution of the DoGood platform will position our
company for long-term success and high social impact for the years to come.
Financial Assessment
Income Statement
As shown in Figures 18, 19, and 20 (Income Statements), DoGood derives its revenue as a
percentage charge of the net amount of donations done through the application. This amount
depends on the number of users actively using the application, the number of cause organizations
actively advertising funding programs, and some specific behavioral parameters of both users and
nonprofits. These parameters include: 1) the average number of fundraising campaigns undertaken
by each nonprofit, 2) the users cap on pushed notifications allowed per month and different setting
profiles established by end users, and 3) donation-specific characteristics of an average user in
terms of the average amount per donation and the percentage of campaigns to which they would
donate.
As DoGood operates under a two tier pricing structure for nonprofits and corporations (total price
of 3% and 8% respectively for the first years of operations), the amount of cause organization
campaigns sponsored by business also influences the level of revenue. A variable cost structure is
used for major line items such as credit card transactions, hosting and server fees, and development
and maintenance. However, costs such as salaries, marketing, and SG&A require important initial
investments as a percentage of total revenues. As sales expand, such cost line items become highly
leverageable with a decreasing marginal component per extra unit of revenue.
Figures 19 and 20 detail the expected quarterly behavior of the different variables for the next five
years of operations. The reasoning for such estimations and interpolations is derived from
incorporating the different elements and understanding gained from primary and empirical
research on the market, the end user base (users, nonprofits and businesses) and some industry
specifics adjusted by macroeconomic estimates and forecasts.
As seen in Figure 20, based on our assumptions (Figures 16 and 17), DoGood would turn revenue
positive by the first quarter of 2016, recording a modest year-end profit, taking advantage of the tax
credits derived from previous net losses from past periods. DoGood will report net earnings of
$14.8M by the fourth quarter of 2018. Please see the following pages for our analysis for various
sensitivity projections on such numbers.
Balance Sheet
The DoGood business venture operates under a lean assumption in which most of the costs are
variable. This assumption greatly reduces the risks inherent to the business; however, it also
reduces the potential in the short term for extraordinary performance. Positive future revenue
growth would come along with a subsequent increase in the cost base, therefore keeping stable
revenue margins. In the event of a negative future performance the company would have a
substantial reduction on the cost structure as a result of decreasing revenues. This would require
spending fewer resources to pay out cost expenses in a time when liquidity and capital are scarce.
Due to the nature of the variable cost structure of the enterprise, there is no need to own a
significant amount of fixed assets. The office space, most of the main servers, computers, and
software are going to be acquired under short-term renting or leasing agreements.
In relationship to the line items of cash and cash equivalents and investable securities, DoGood has
a liquidity buffer of $2.5M to finance the first years of operations as a result of the first round of
financing raised from angel investors and the contribution of partners and the management team of
the company. Please refer to Figure 23 (Balance sheet) for further details.
Cash Flow
As seen in Figure 24 (Cash Flow), most of the cost structure of the company is variable. As a result,
the net revenue line closely mimics the net cash flow generated/utilized by the company.
Depreciation of fixed assets is minimal as a result of the low amount of fixed assets owed. Future
increases in working capital as well as in capital expenditures would be materialized in the cost
margin structure in which cost are a stable, or sometimes even decreasing, percentage charge on
growing revenues.
It is important to note that due to the nature of the incentive compensation to employees, the line
becomes a positive cash flow generating item. The bonus compensation although fully charged as a
cost item on revenues, and therefore reducing the net income, is not fully paid in cash. Half of the
compensation is paid out in a stock participation in the company; therefore in the cash flow
statement it needs to be added back to net income as it is a charge that does not represent cash
outflows. For the case of taxed credits, the amount is adjusted directly in the income statements
when revenues become positive and taxable. In order to balance the source and uses of cash flows,
DoGood needs to raise $1.5M in equity financing by the second quarter of 2014.
Sensitivity
Please refer to Figures 25 and 26 (Sensitivity Analysis) to observe the net profit sensitivity analysis
in regards to DoGood operational costs. Independent analyses are provided for both the variable
cost margin and net amount of fixed operational expenses by 2018. Those factors in the DoGood
cost structure were related against key and determinant business metrics such as 1) the number of
end users by 2018, 2) average amount per donation for 2016 to 2018 and 3) percentage of people
donating by 2018. The sensitivity analysis provides an opportunity to make the initial assumptions
flexible while adjusting, both in total and in percentage terms, each of the business exogenous
variables in order to understand the way in which each factor independently, and in conjunction
with one another, affects the net profit of the enterprise by 2018.
We found that a variable cost margin ranging from (12% to 35%) in conjunction with the total
number of end users, by 2018, taking values in the (2 to 8 million) ranges, would generate net
profits for DoGood by 2018 ranging from ($-1.7 to $29.5 million). Similarly, variable cost margins
placed in the mentioned (12% to 35%) range, with the average donation amount for 2016 to 2018
varying from ($2 to $20), and the percentage of users donating by 2018 changing from (10% to
50%), would represent a net profit by 2018 in the form of ($-3.7 to $33.1 million) and ($-0.8 to
$33.2 million) respectively.
Although the nature of the DoGood business model is based on a significant variable cost structure,
we also found it important to analyze the sensitivity of the business model in regards to variations
in the amount of fixed costs that come in the form of marketing expenses, salaries and other SG&A
line items such as rental and lease charges. We followed the same process used for the analysis of
the sensitivity for the variables costs margin case. Fixed costs for 2018 vary in a range of ($4 to $25
million), and 1) the total number of end users, by 2018, in a (2 to 8 million) range, 2) the average
amount per donation for 2016 to 2018 in a ($2 to $20) range and 3) the percentage of user donating
by 2018 changing in a (10% to 50%) range. This would generate net profit for the business by 2018
of 1) ($-9.1 to $30 million), 2) ($-11.5 to $33.2 million), and 3) ($-7.9 to $33.2 million) respectively.
Please refer to Figures 25 and 26 (Sensitivity Analysis). It is encouraging to notice that even with a
wide variation of 50% from our initial assumptions, the DoGood business model would still be able
to generate, although modest, positive net profits by 2018.
Based on the assumptions of our sensitivity analysis, we created a simple Monte Carlo model that
looks at the probability of multiple variations in the original assumptions and the impact it would
have on the 2018 outcomes. In this model, revenue is created from a percentage of the total user
population that contributes through the application at a specific amount. The total number of users,
percent of participation, and amount of the donation are independently and randomly generated
using triangular distribution. From this revenue is subtracted. The variable costs and fixed costs are
also independently and randomly generated from a triangular distribution. If EBIT is positive then
taxes are applied at a set 40% and the remainder is the net profit/loss. Based on this model the
scenario was replicated 1,100 times and the results summarized. (See Figure 27)
The current income statement indicates that projected earnings in 2018 will be over $14M. From
the simulation we see that this could be as high as $22M and that the average revenue from the
1100 simulations is positive at $364,179. Though the greatest loss came in at -$16M the actuality of
this kind of loss is marginally probably and does not take into consideration managerial strategies
that would be implemented to alter expenses that would not be justified in a net loss year. This
model further confirms that the assumptions are reasonable with a expected profit between 0 and a
probable max.
Figure 16: Financial Assumptions 2014-2015
2103
Q4
Asumptions
Growth
Non profits Growth rate/month for nonprofits
Number of promotions per nonprofit
Growth rate/month of users
Average cap on promotion received/month
Number of users provided by initial nonprofits
User Downloading the App initially
Revenue
Donation Per Promotion
% People donating
Promotional revenue sponsered by Corporations
Price
Nonprofits
Companies
Costs
Credit Card Fess
Hosting and server
App design and Maintance
2014
2015
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
20%
1
15%
3
20%
1
15%
3
20%
1
15%
3
20%
1
15%
3
20%
1
10%
3
20%
1
10%
3
20%
1
10%
3
20%
1
10%
3
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
$10.00
20%
50%
$10.00
20%
50%
$10.00
20%
50%
$10.00
20%
50%
$10.00
20%
50%
$10.00
20%
50%
$10.00
20%
50%
$10.00
20%
50%
$10.00
20%
50%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
1.5%
0.50%
0.10%
1.5%
0.50%
0.10%
1.5%
0.50%
0.10%
1.5%
0.50%
0.10%
1.5%
0.50%
0.10%
1.5%
0.50%
0.10%
1.5%
0.50%
0.10%
1.5%
0.50%
0.10%
1.5%
0.40%
0.10%
20%
1
15%
3
200,000
0.15
Figure 17: Financial Assumptions 2016-2018
2016
Asumptions
Growth
Non profits Growth rate/month for nonprofits
Number of promotions per nonprofit
Growth rate/month of users
Average cap on promotion received/month
Number of users provided by initial nonprofits
User Downloading the App initially
Revenue
Donation Per Promotion
% People donating
Promotional revenue sponsered by Corporations
Price
Nonprofits
Companies
Costs
Credit Card Fess
Hosting and server
2017
2018
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
15%
1
5%
3
15%
1
5%
3
15%
1
5%
3
15%
1
5%
3
15%
1
3%
3
15%
1
3%
3
15%
1
3%
3
15%
1
3%
3
10%
1
3%
3
10%
1
3%
3
10%
1
3%
3
10%
1
3%
3
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.25
$12.00
20%
50%
$12.00
20%
50%
$12.00
20%
50%
$12.00
20%
50%
$12.00
25%
60%
$12.00
25%
60%
$12.00
25%
60%
$12.00
25%
60%
$12.00
30%
60%
$12.00
30%
60%
$12.00
30%
60%
$12.00
30%
60%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
8.0%
3.00%
10.0%
3.00%
10.0%
3.00%
10.0%
3.00%
10.0%
3.00%
10.0%
3.00%
10.0%
3.00%
10.0%
3.00%
10.0%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
1.0%
0.40%
0.10%
Figure 18: 2013-2014 Monthly Income Statements
(648,383)
(648,383)
47,000
20,000
51,000
50,000
2,500
9,200
179,700
35,000
18,000
30,000
25,200
15,000
18,000
302,500
623,400
(998,400)
(998,400)
Marketing
Launch costs
PR, Branded Content
Advertising/ Sponsorship
Consulting support
Trade Association & other fees
Collateral
Social Media/SEO/Web
Total Marketing
SG&A
Rent
Accounting Vendor
Legal
Travel & Accomodation
Insurance
Other G & A
Salaries
Total Costs
EBIT
40%
Tax Credits
Net Profit
732,153
402,970
19,238
9,000
15,000
6,300
7,500
12,000
50,000
24,000
79,645
13,333
2,500
6,667
84,000
260,145
83,770
(375,000)
Operational Income
36,957
12,319
2,464
51,740
36,957
98,553
135,510
5
5
136,879
1,231,909
2,463,818
25,000
350,000
375,000
3
3
90,000
810,000
Q1
Cost
Credit Card Transaction fees
Hosting and server
Total
Revenue
Non profits
Companies
Total
Total Number of Nonprofits

Number of Promotions
Total Number of Users
Total number of possible views
Total Donations ($)
2103
TOTAL
(598,999)
(598,999)
726,403
447,220
19,238
9,000
15,000
6,300
7,500
12,000
24,000
79,645
13,333
2,500
6,667
84,000
210,145
127,403
56,207
18,736
3,747
78,690
56,207
149,886
206,094
9
9
208,175
1,873,579
3,747,158
Q2
(427,565)
(427,565)
621,330
447,220
19,238
9,000
15,000
6,300
7,500
12,000
12,000
39,823
6,667
1,250
3,333
42,000
105,073
193,765
85,484
28,495
5,699
119,678
85,484
227,958
313,443
15
15
316,609
2,849,480
5,698,960
2014
Q3
(634,256)
(634,256)
928,948
649,765
19,238
9,000
15,000
6,300
7,500
12,000
24,000
79,645
13,333
2,500
6,667
84,000
210,145
294,692
130,011
43,337
8,667
182,016
130,011
346,696
476,707
27
27
481,523
4,333,703
8,667,405
Q4
(2,309,203)
(2,309,203)
3,008,833
1,947,175
76,950
36,000
60,000
25,200
30,000
48,000
50,000
84,000
278,758
46,667
8,750
23,333
294,000
785,508
699,630
308,660
102,887
20,577
432,124
308,660
823,094
1,131,754
27
56
481,523
10,288,670
20,577,341
TOTAL
(494,751)
(494,751)
886,986
577,923
33,750
9,000
24,000
12,500
15,000
15,000
22,820
75,729
12,678
2,377
6,339
79,870
199,813
392,235
173,045
57,682
11,536
242,263
173,045
461,453
634,497
46
46
640,906
5,768,158
11,536,316
Q1
(413,770)
(689,616)
(275,847)
1,211,681
702,805
33,750
9,000
24,000
12,500
15,000
15,000
45,640
151,458
25,356
4,754
12,678
159,740
399,626
522,064
230,323
76,774
15,355
322,452
230,323
614,193
844,516
80
80
853,046
7,677,418
15,354,837
Q2
(249,451)
(415,751)
(166,301)
1,110,619
801,556
33,750
9,000
24,000
12,500
15,000
15,000
22,820
75,729
12,678
2,377
6,339
79,870
199,812.87
694,868
306,559
102,186
20,437
429,183
306,559
817,492
1,124,051
138
138
1,135,405
10,218,644
20,437,288
2015
Q3
(359,449)
(599,082)
(239,633)
1,551,153
1,042,278
33,750
9,000
24,000
12,500
15,000
15,000
45,640
151,458
25,356
4,754
12,678
159,740
399,626
952,071
408,030
108,808
27,202
544,041
408,030
1,088,081
1,496,112
238
238
1,511,224
13,601,015
27,202,030
Q4
(2,199,201)
(879,680)
(1,319,520)
4,760,439
3,124,562
135,000
36,000
96,000
50,000
60,000
60,000
136,920
454,375
76,067
14,263
38,033
479,220
1,198,877
2,561,238
1,117,957
345,450
74,530
1,537,938
1,117,957
2,981,219
4,099,176
238
503
1,511,224
37,265,236
74,530,472
TOTAL
Figure 19: 2014-2015 Quarterly Income Statements
44,955
149,186
24,975
4,683
12,488
157,344
393,631
35,438
9,000
27,000
18,750
18,000
18,000
989,597
1,509,416
2,092
837
(837)
2,092
SG&A
Rent
Accounting Vendor
Legal
Travel & Accomodation
Insurance
Other G & A
Salaries
Total Costs
EBIT
40%
Tax Credits
Net Profit
1,511,508
Marketing
Launch costs
PR, Branded Content
Advertising/ Sponsorship
Consulting support
Trade Association & other fees
Collateral
Social Media/SEO/Web
Total Marketing
Operational Income
377,877
151,151
37,788
566,816
566,816
1,511,508
2,078,324
Revenue
Non profits
Companies
Total
Cost
Credit Card Transaction fees
Hosting and server
Total
363
363
1,749,431
15,744,875
37,787,700
Total Number of Nonprofits

Number of Promotions
Total Number of Users
Total number of possible views
Total Donations ($)
Q1
(153,288)
(61,315)
61,315
(153,288)
1,903,047
989,597
35,438
9,000
27,000
18,750
18,000
18,000
89,911
298,373
49,950
9,366
24,975
314,688
787,263
1,749,759
437,440
174,976
43,744
656,160
656,160
1,749,759
2,405,919
552
552
2,025,185
18,226,661
43,743,987
Q2
292,379
116,952
(116,952)
292,379
1,733,186
1,213,367
35,438
9,000
27,000
18,750
18,000
18,000
44,955
149,186
24,975
4,683
12,488
157,344
393,631
2,025,565
506,391
202,557
50,639
759,587
759,587
2,025,565
2,785,152
839
839
2,344,404
21,099,639
50,639,133
2016
Q3
(82,578)
(33,031)
33,031
(82,578)
2,427,423
1,513,973
35,438
9,000
27,000
18,750
18,000
18,000
89,911
298,373
49,950
9,366
24,975
314,688
787,263
2,344,845
586,211
234,485
58,621
879,317
879,317
2,344,845
3,224,162
1,276
1,276
2,713,941
24,425,469
58,621,126
Q4
58,605
23,442
(23,442)
58,605
7,573,072
4,706,534
141,750
36,000
108,000
75,000
72,000
72,000
269,732
895,118
149,851
28,097
74,926
944,063
2,361,788
7,631,678
1,907,919
763,168
190,792
2,861,879
2,861,879
7,631,678
10,493,557
TOTAL
1,276
3,029
2,713,941
79,496,644
190,791,946
2,566,311
1,026,524
(2,179,279)
3,719,066
1,997,743
1,249,768
36,501
9,270
27,810
19,313
18,540
18,540
70,580
234,223
39,211
7,352
19,606
247,030
618,001
4,564,053
800,711
320,284
80,071
1,201,067
960,853
4,804,267
5,765,120
1,941
1,941
2,965,597
26,690,370
80,071,109
Q1
3,451,976
1,380,790
2,071,185
1,422,912
1,997,743
1,249,768
36,501
9,270
27,810
19,313
18,540
18,540
70,580
234,223
39,211
7,352
19,606
247,030
618,001
5,449,718
956,091
382,436
95,609
1,434,136
1,147,309
5,736,545
6,883,855
2017
Q3
4,489
4,489
3,541,077
31,869,697
95,609,091
2,371,520
948,608
2,615,744
1,249,768
36,501
9,270
27,810
19,313
18,540
18,540
141,160
468,445
78,422
14,704
39,211
494,060
1,236,002
4,987,264
874,959
349,983
87,496
1,312,438
1,049,950
5,249,752
6,299,702
2,951
2,951
3,240,588
29,165,288
87,495,863
Q2
1,817,812
3,029,686
1,211,874
2,925,368
1,559,392
36,501
9,270
27,810
19,313
18,540
18,540
141,160
468,445
78,422
14,704
39,211
494,060
1,236,002
5,955,054
1,044,746
417,899
104,475
1,567,120
1,253,696
6,268,478
7,522,174
6,827
6,827
3,869,431
34,824,879
104,474,636
Q4
9,030,975
11,419,493
9,536,597
5,308,697
146,003
37,080
111,240
77,250
74,160
74,160
423,480
1,405,336
235,267
44,112
117,633
1,482,180
3,708,007
20,956,090
3,676,507
1,470,603
367,651
5,514,760
4,411,808
22,059,042
26,470,850
TOTAL
6,827
16,208
3,869,431
122,550,233
367,650,698
3,306,002
5,510,003
2,204,001
2,298,695
1,287,261
37,596
9,548
28,644
19,892
19,096
19,096
100,224
332,596
55,680
10,440
27,840
350,782
877,562
7,808,698
1,369,947
547,979
136,995
2,054,921
1,643,936
8,219,682
9,863,619
9,087
9,087
4,228,232
38,054,085
136,994,706
Q1
3,236,407
5,394,011
2,157,605
3,138,764
1,249,768
37,596
9,548
28,644
19,892
19,096
19,096
200,447
665,192
111,360
20,880
55,680
701,565
1,755,123
8,532,775
1,496,978
598,791
149,698
2,245,467
1,796,374
8,981,869
10,778,243
Q2
12,094
12,094
4,620,303
41,582,726
149,697,814
4,237,675
7,062,792
2,825,117
2,261,202
1,249,768
37,596
9,548
28,644
19,892
19,096
19,096
100,224
332,596
55,680
10,440
27,840
350,782
877,562
9,323,994
1,635,788
654,315
163,579
2,453,683
1,962,946
9,814,731
11,777,677
2018
Q3
16,097
16,097
5,048,730
45,438,568
163,578,844
4,038,542
6,730,903
2,692,361
3,457,677
1,568,681
37,596
9,548
28,644
19,892
19,096
19,096
200,447
665,192
111,360
20,880
55,680
701,565
1,755,123
10,188,580
1,787,470
714,988
178,747
2,681,205
2,144,964
10,724,821
12,869,785
Q4
21,426
21,426
5,516,883
49,651,950
178,747,019
14,818,625
24,697,709
9,879,084
11,156,339
5,355,479
150,383
38,192
114,577
79,568
76,385
76,385
601,341
1,995,577
334,079
62,640
167,039
2,104,695
5,265,370
35,854,048
6,290,184
2,516,074
629,018
9,435,276
7,548,221
37,741,103
45,289,324
TOTAL
21,426
58,704
5,516,883
174,727,329
629,018,383
Figure 20: 2016-2018 Quarterly Income Statements
110,000
95,000
80,000
95,000
80,000
VP Business Development
Director of Product Design
Strategic Bussines Manager
Chief Technology Officer

Sr Development Engineer
Development Engineer
Controller
HR Manager
Total Employees
Total Salary
Total Bonus
Benefits Cost
Raises
Total Compensation
110,000
90,000
75,000
Chief Sales/Marketing Officer

Director of Marketing
Director Major Accounts
Director of Sales
Regional Sales Manager
Sales Support
Customer Support
7,917
6,667
9,167
7,917
6,667
9,167
7,500
6,250
19,000
8,000
33,000
19,000
16,000
33,000
18,000
7,500
23,000
18,000
17,000
17,000
7,500
4,200
4,800
115,000
90,000
85,000
85,000
75,000
42,000
48,000
Role
CEO
Executive Asistant
9,583
7,500
7,083
7,083
6,250
3,500
4,000
Compensation
Salary Monthly
Bonus
140,000
11,667
42,000
64,000
5,333
6,400
17.5
379,000
18%
447,220
15.5
341,500
18%
402,970
1
0.5
2
1
0.5
1
1
1
4
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2014 Q2
1
1
1
1
1
2014 Q1
1
1
2014
447,220
18%
17.5
379,000
1
0.5
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
1
2014 Q3
1
1
649,765
20.5
421,750
152,100
18%
1
0.5
1
1
1
5
1
2
1
1
1
2014 Q4
1
1
18%
3%
577,923
23
489,765
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
5
1
2
1
1
1
2015 Q1
1
1
702,805
18%
29
595,598
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
8
1
4
1
2
1
35
691,645
226,137
18%
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
10
2
6
2015 Q4
1
1
801,556 1,042,278
18%
34
679,285
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
10
2
5
2015
2015 Q2 2015 Q3
1
1
1
1
Figure 21: Salaries Quarterly 2014-2015
110,000
95,000
80,000
95,000
80,000
Chief Technology Officer

Sr Development Engineer
Development Engineer
Controller
HR Manager
Total Employees
Total Salary
Total Bonus
Benefits Cost
Raises
Total Compensation
110,000
90,000
75,000
VP Business Development
Director of Product Design
Strategic Bussines Manager
7,917
6,667
9,167
7,917
6,667
9,167
7,500
6,250
19,000
8,000
33,000
19,000
16,000
33,000
18,000
7,500
18%
3%
989,597
42
838,641
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
14
2
8
Chief Sales/Marketing Officer

Director of Marketing
Director Major Accounts
Director of Sales
Regional Sales Manager
Sales Support
Customer Support
23,000
18,000
17,000
17,000
7,500
4,200
4,800
115,000
90,000
85,000
85,000
75,000
42,000
48,000
Role
CEO
Executive Asistant
9,583
7,500
7,083
7,083
6,250
3,500
4,000
Compensation
Salary Monthly
Bonus
2016 Q1
140,000
11,667
42,000
1
64,000
5,333
6,400
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
20
4
10
2016 Q3
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
20
4
10
2016 Q4
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
20
4
10
2017 Q1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
20
4
10
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
20
4
10
2017
2017 Q2 2017 Q3
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
20
4
10
2017 Q4
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
20
4
10
2018 Q1
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
20
4
10
2018 Q2
1
1
2018
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
20
4
10
2018 Q3
1
1
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
20
4
10
2018 Q4
1
1
42
53
53
53
53
53
53
53
53
53
53
838,641 1,028,277 1,028,277 1,059,126 1,059,126 1,059,126 1,059,126 1,090,899 1,059,126 1,059,126 1,059,126
300,606
309,624
318,913
18%
18%
18%
18%
18%
18%
18%
18%
18%
18%
18%
3%
3%
989,597 1,213,367 1,513,973 1,249,768 1,249,768 1,249,768 1,559,392 1,287,261 1,249,768 1,249,768 1,568,681
1
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
14
2
8
2016 Q2
1
1
2016
Figure 22: Salaries Quarterly 2016-2018
Figure 23: Balance Sheet
Figure 24: Cash Flow Statement

2103
Free CashFlow
Net Profit
Depreciation & Amortization
Incentive Compensation
Cash Flow
Source (Use) of Funds
Cash and Money Market
Investable Securities
Debt
Issuance of New Stocks
Total
2014
2015
(898,400)
(2,309,203)
100,000
76,050
(2,133,153)
(1,319,520)
100,000
113,068
(1,106,452)
58,605
100,000
150,303
308,908
9,030,975
154,812
9,185,787
200,000
698,400
100,000
533,153
100,000
1,006,452
(308,908)
(9,185,787) (14,978,082)
898,400
1,500,000
2,133,153
1,106,452
(308,908)
(9,185,787) (14,978,082)
(998,400)
100,000
2016
2017
2018
14,818,625
159,456
14,978,082
Figure 25: Sensitivity Analysis- Variable Cost
Net Profit 2018

#REF!
12%
15%
20%
22%
24%
30%
35%
7,000,000
24,609,270
23,542,120
21,763,536
21,052,103
20,340,669
18,206,369
16,427,785
8,000,000
29,536,144
28,301,032
26,242,512
25,419,104
24,595,696
22,125,473
20,066,953
Net Profit 2018

Average Amount per Donation 2016/2018
2 $
5 $
10 $
12 $
14 $
15
#REF! $
12% (2,708,343) 3,269,848 13,233,499 17,218,960 21,204,420 23,197,150
15% (2,844,211) 2,930,178 12,554,159 16,403,752 20,253,344 22,178,141
20% (3,070,657) 2,364,061 11,421,926 15,045,072 18,668,218 20,479,791
22% (3,161,236) 2,137,615 10,969,033 14,501,600 18,034,167 19,800,451
24% (3,251,815) 1,911,168 10,516,140 13,958,128 17,400,117 19,121,111
30% (3,523,551) 1,231,828
9,157,460 12,327,713 15,497,965 17,083,092
35% (3,749,997)
665,712
8,025,227 10,969,033 13,912,839 15,384,742
$
20
33,160,801
31,802,122
29,537,656
28,631,869
27,726,083
25,008,723
22,744,257
% Variable Cost Margin

by 2018
3,000,000
4,901,776
4,506,472
3,847,632
3,584,096
3,320,560
2,529,953
1,871,113

by 2018
2,000,000
(25,098)
(252,440)
(631,344)
(782,905)
(934,467)
(1,389,151)
(1,768,055)
Number Users 2018

4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
9,828,649 14,755,523 19,682,396
9,265,384 14,024,296 18,783,208
8,326,608 12,805,584 17,284,560
7,951,098 12,318,099 16,685,101
7,575,587 11,830,615 16,085,642
6,449,057 10,368,161 14,287,265
5,510,281
9,149,449 12,788,617

by 2018
Net Profit 2018

#REF!
12%
15%
20%
22%
24%
30%
35%
10%
1,277,118
1,005,382
552,489
371,331
190,174
(353,298)
(806,191)
20%
9,248,039
8,704,567
7,798,780
7,436,466
7,074,151
5,987,207
5,081,421
% Users Donating by 2018

25%
30%
35%
13,233,499 17,218,960 21,204,420
12,554,159 16,403,752 20,253,344
11,421,926 15,045,072 18,668,218
10,969,033 14,501,600 18,034,167
10,516,140 13,958,128 17,400,117
9,157,460 12,327,713 15,497,965
8,025,227 10,969,033 13,912,839
40%
25,189,881
24,102,937
22,291,364
21,566,735
20,842,105
18,668,218
16,856,645
50%
33,160,801
31,802,122
29,537,656
28,631,869
27,726,083
25,008,723
22,744,257
Figure 26: Sensitivity Analysis- Fixed Cost
Net Profit 2018

#REF!
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
11,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
7,000,000
25,607,819
24,407,819
23,207,819
21,407,819
19,007,819
16,007,819
13,007,819
8,000,000
30,030,808
28,830,808
27,630,808
25,830,808
23,430,808
20,430,808
17,430,808
Average Amount per Donation 2016/2018

2 $
5 $
10 $
12 $
14 $
15
1,084,053
6,450,838 15,395,480 18,973,336 22,551,193 24,340,121
(115,947)
5,250,838 14,195,480 17,773,336 21,351,193 23,140,121
(1,315,947)
4,050,838 12,995,480 16,573,336 20,151,193 21,940,121
(3,115,947)
2,250,838 11,195,480 14,773,336 18,351,193 20,140,121
(5,515,947)
(149,162)
8,795,480 12,373,336 15,951,193 17,740,121
(8,515,947) (3,149,162)
5,795,480
9,373,336 12,951,193 14,740,121
(11,515,947) (6,149,162)
2,795,480
6,373,336
9,951,193 11,740,121
$
20
33,284,762
32,084,762
30,884,762
29,084,762
26,684,762
23,684,762
20,684,762
Fixed Cost by 2018
2,000,000
3,492,875
2,292,875
1,092,875
(707,125)
(3,107,125)
(6,107,125)
(9,107,125)
Fixed Cost by 2018
Net Profit 2018

#REF!
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
11,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
Fixed Cost by 2018
Net Profit 2018

#REF!
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
11,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
3,000,000
7,915,864
6,715,864
5,515,864
3,715,864
1,315,864
(1,684,136)
(4,684,136)
Number Users 2018

4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
12,338,853 16,761,842 21,184,831
11,138,853 15,561,842 19,984,831
9,938,853 14,361,842 18,784,831
8,138,853 12,561,842 16,984,831
5,738,853 10,161,842 14,584,831
2,738,853
7,161,842 11,584,831
(261,147)
4,161,842
8,584,831
10%
4,661,910
3,461,910
2,261,910
461,910
(1,938,090)
(4,938,090)
(7,938,090)
20%
11,817,623
10,617,623
9,417,623
7,617,623
5,217,623
2,217,623
(782,377)
% Users Donating by 2018

25%
30%
35%
15,395,480 18,973,336 22,551,193
14,195,480 17,773,336 21,351,193
12,995,480 16,573,336 20,151,193
11,195,480 14,773,336 18,351,193
8,795,480 12,373,336 15,951,193
5,795,480
9,373,336 12,951,193
2,795,480
6,373,336
9,951,193
40%
26,129,049
24,929,049
23,729,049
21,929,049
19,529,049
16,529,049
13,529,049
50%
33,284,762
32,084,762
30,884,762
29,084,762
26,684,762
23,684,762
20,684,762
Figure 27: Monte Carlo Simulation
Model Budget
Number of Users
Triangular Distribution
6,892,415.00
LL
2,000,000
Expected
5,500,000
UL
8,000,000
Average Donation amount

$17.84
LL
2.00
Expected
12.00
UL
20.00
Percentage of users who donate

38%
LL
10%
Expected
30%
UL
50%
Revenues
Variable Cost Margin
$46,989,688.00
13%
LL
12%
Expected
21%
UL
35%
Fixed Cost
$10,853,560.00
LL
Expected
$ 11,000,000.00
UL
$ 20,000,000.00
EBIT
Tax
40%
Net Profit/Loss
4,000,000.00
$29,927,473.00
$11,970,989.00
17,956,484
Simulation Analysis
$
$
Min
1st Quartile
median
3rd Quartile
Max
$
$
$
$
$
364,179.00
5,758,919.83
(16,464,692.88)
(3,610,475.75)
652,233.36
4,060,336.37
22,614,300.15 200
100
Percentile over $0
56%
Count
1,100
Histogram:
Probability of
0
(22)
(16)
(10)
(4)
2
8
14
Average
St Dev.
Probability of
Success
Appendix A: Qualitative Interviews

Discussion Guides
DoGood In-depth Interview Facilitators Guide - Nonprofits
DATE:
TIME:
INTERVIEWER:
PHONE OR IN-PERSON:
AUDIENCE (INDIVIDUAL, NGO, BUSINESS):
Opening (2-3 minutes)
Introduction: Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. This interview will last no
more than 30 minutes. I will ask series of questions related to the mobile application, DoGood. Your open
and honest feedback is appreciated. For questions that you do not know the answer to please just say I
dont know.
Purpose: [You are not obligated to read this verbatim to the interviewee; it is here for reference when you
provide the overview of DoGood.] DoGood is a mobile application that connects individuals with the
causes that they care about and the businesses that support them. The audiences for DoGood are nonprofit organizations, for-profit businesses, and individuals. Non-profits are able to solicit volunteers and
promote events, businesses are able to promote co-sponsored charitable activities, and individuals can
find volunteer opportunities or charitable events in their local area. The DoGood application is scheduled
to launch in winter 2013. DoGood: Give is a planned module of the application. The Give module would
allow individuals to donate money to their favorite causes directly through the application. Through a
series of interviews, we are hoping to get a better understanding of the types of individuals who would
donate through the app, what reservations people may have, and key features that would help DoGood:
Give be successful.
Disclosures: I will be taking notes during this discussion to capture all ideas and thoughts shared. The
summary notes will not include any names or personally identifying information.
Are there any questions at this time?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In-depth Interview Questions
For Non-Profit Organizations:
Interviewee Information
What is your name?
What is your title/role in the organization and key functions?
Organizational Fundraising Information
What is the primary mission of your organization?

What types of fundraising events does your non-profit organize or participate in?
How would you characterize events number of participants, type of events, require several
volunteers, etc.?
How do you market these charitable events?
What are some of the challenges you face when looking for volunteers or participants in your
events?
When volunteers are needed, how do you currently engage potential volunteers?
Partnerships with For-Profits
How often do you partner with a for-profit organization for fundraising?
When partnering with a for-profit, what is the most common type of fundraising activity?
If you co-sponsor an event with a non-profit, how are the planning and promotion duties
divided up between organizations?
Application Usage
Would you consider using an application to promote events to both potential volunteers and
participants?
How do you currently receive monetary donations (in-person, mail, online, etc.)?
What would you say are the key demographics of people donating to your organization and
what is the average donation?
Would you use an application to receive donations?
If such an application existed, what are the functions that would be most important to you?
DoGood In-depth Interview Facilitators Guide - Individuals

DATE:
TIME:
INTERVIEWER:
PHONE OR IN-PERSON:
AUDIENCE (INDIVIDUAL, NGO, BUSINESS):
Opening (2-3 minutes)
Introduction: Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me. This interview will last no
more than 30 minutes. I will ask series of questions related to the mobile application, DoGood. Your open
and honest feedback is appreciated. For questions that you do not know the answer to please just say I
dont know.
Purpose: [You are not obligated to read this verbatim to the interviewee; it is here for reference when you
provide the overview of DoGood.] DoGood is a mobile application that connects individuals with the
causes that they care about and the businesses that support them. The audiences for DoGood are nonprofit organizations, for-profit businesses, and individuals. Non-profits are able to solicit volunteers and
promote events, businesses are able to promote co-sponsored charitable activities, and individuals can
find volunteer opportunities or charitable events in their local area. The DoGood application is scheduled
to launch in winter 2013. DoGood: Give is a planned module of the application. The Give module would
allow individuals to donate money to their favorite causes directly through the application. Through a
series of interviews, we are hoping to get a better understanding of the types of individuals who would
donate through the app, what reservations people may have, and key features that would help DoGood:
Give be successful.
Disclosures: I will be taking notes during this discussion to capture all ideas and thoughts shared. The
summary notes will not include any names or personally identifying information.
Are there any questions at this time?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In-depth Interview Questions
For Individual Consumers:
Interviewee Information
What is your name?
What is your occupation?
Volunteering Practices
What is your opinion on volunteering/giving back?
How often do you volunteer your time?
What types of volunteer opportunities do you seek?

How do you currently find volunteer opportunities?
What organizations do you volunteer with or donate to most frequently?
Donating Practices
How much do you donate to charity annually?
On average, how much do you donate during a single donation?
When you donate money, what channel do you use (mail, in-person, web payment, etc.)?
What are the key factors that make you want to donate more/less to an organization?
Application Usage
How often do you use applications (smart phone or tablet) and what types of applications do
you frequently use?
Would you be interested in an application that helps you find volunteer opportunities and
charitable events in your local area?
If the functionality were available, would you consider donating money to a charity through
the application? If not, why not?
What are some of the key features you would like to see in such an application?
How would you feel if the application made money by receiving a very small percentage of
your donation (flat fee or less than 1%)?
Interview Results
Organization
Citi Performing Arts
Overview
Nonprofit steward of iconic
venues, providing arts,
entertainment, cultural, and
educational experiences to
the greater community
Achieve Mission
Human capital management

consulting firm for
nonprofits- educate sector on
leadership development and
human capital management
Pennsylvania
Horticulture Society
Nonprofit membership
organization that offers
programs, activities,
workshops, and publications
for gardeners
United Way
Provides community support

to promote a world where all
individuals and families
achieve their human
potential through education,
Key Takeaways
Annual Fund giving is preferred over
smaller donations
Demographic is 45-60 years old; started
the Metropolitan Group which is
Millennials, but that is very new
With the corporate sponsors it is all
about who you know, it is all
networking; do very specific events with
corporate sponsors
Would consider using an application
depending on cost and how it is
differentiated from other payment
methods available
Gaining share of voice is difficult in
Boston; it is more efficient to target high
net worth individuals for large
individual donors than try to get small
donations from many
organizations/individuals
Co-branding through the application is a
great idea, but businesses have their
own channels to develop these
relationships DoGood would need to
add value over time
Majority of money goes into the annual
fund
Because the demographic is older, they
do a lot of direct mail; very little email or
social media involved in fundraising
efforts
Using an application targeting
something very specific is an interesting
idea, especially if you have an immediate
need and a very specific need, but a large
organization might say that is why we
raise unrestricted funds in the first place
When using the application, it would be
important to be able to have access to
the data collected
Concerned with "migration to mobile"
and wants to capture value shifting from
website to mobile gives
Mobile text-to-give has not been very
useful outside disasters from his
income stability and healthy

lives
Humanity Corp
Specialize in improving the

lives of the poor with a focus
on the principles of selfreliance and participatory
development
Bridgespan
A nonprofit advisor and

resource for mission-driven
organizations and
philanthropists; collaborate
with social sector leaders to
help scale impact, build
leadership, advance
philanthropic effectiveness
Room to Grow
Enrich the lives of babies

who are born into povertyparenting guidance and
support for expectant
mothers and pair that with
essential baby items for the
critical first three years of life
experience
Trying to capture small value "microdonors" on DoGood, not high value
donors
Addition of a volunteering module will
be HUGE for nonprofits. Volunteers can
become donors and brand champions,
in-kind donations are very valuable
Small nonprofits have very limited
resources and typically rely on personal
connections for fundraising
Small nonprofits would welcome the
help in creating corporate partners and
expanding awareness but only if
available at a low cost
Priorities revolve around funding a
social cause
In spite of running lean operations, they
are willing to pay a fee for fundraising
support if it helps them reach their goals
Few nonprofits become powerful
fundraisers
Those that raise the most money
typically rely on a single fundraising
method as it becomes more cost
effective
Fundraising among individual donors
are typically smaller donations and is
more successful model for nonprofits
with really pithy campaigns
There are lots of wonderful nonprofits in
the city of Boston competing for the
same dollars
Looking to make new corporate
relationships. This one of the areas
support/help is needed. Right now
partnerships are very transactional
Need to build better/stronger
relationships with our donors
Regarding using the application, feels it
is a saturated market and fees and fine
print make it unpalatable. Would need
to consider how user friendly,
opportunity costs, etc.
Appendix B: Quantitative Survey

Questionnaire
Survey Results
Appendix C: Overhead Rates in Nonprofit Organizations
Appendix D: Top 50 Cause organizations in U.S.

Name of Organization
YMCA of the USA
Goodwill Industries
International
Catholic Charities USA
United Way
American Red Cross
The Salvation Army
Habitat for Humanity Int'l
Boys & Girls Clubs of America
Easter Seals
Smithsonian Institution
Feeding America
Task Force for Global Health
Planned Parenthood
Federation of America
World Vision
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
The Salvation Army Nature
Conservancy
Shriners Hospital for Children
American Cancer Society
Food for the Poor
Boy Scouts of America
Catholic Relief Services
ALSAC/St. Judes Childrens
Research Hospital
Childrens Hospital Los
Angeles
Girl Scouts of the USA
YWCA
AmeriCares
American Heart Association
Save the Children
C.A.R.E.
Compassion International
Campus Crusade for Christ
Fred Hutchinson Cancer
Research Center
Metropolitan Museum of Art
United States Fund for
U.N.I.C.E.F
Feed the Children
Web Page
# Offices in U.S.
2,700
http://www.ymca.net/
165
http://www.goodwill.org/
http://www.catholiccharitiesusa.org/
http://www.unitedway.org/
http://www.redcross.org
http://www.salvationarmyusa.org
http://www.habitat.org/
http://www.bgca.org
http://www.easterseals.com/
http://www.si.edu/
http://feedingamerica.org/
http://www.taskforce.org/
157
1,350
769
1,252
1,500
4,000
550
177
202
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/
71
9
6
http://www.worldvision.org/
http://www.dana-farber.org/
http://www.nature.org
50
http://www.shrinershospitalsforchildre
n.org/
http://www.cancer.org/
http://www.foodforthepoor.org/
http://www.scouting.org/
http://crs.org/
22
900
100,000
5,000
http://www.stjude.org
http://www.chla.org/
http://www.girlscouts.org/
http://www.ywca.org
http://www.americares.org/
http://www.heart.org
http://savethechildren.org
http://www.care.org/about/faqs.asp
http://www.compassion.com/
http://www.campuscrusade.com/
100
250
144
9
http://www.fhcrc.org/en.html
http://www.metmuseum.org/
http://www.unicefusa.org
http://www.feedthechildren.org
1,200
Direct Relief International

PBS
International Rescue
Committee
Art Institute of Chicago
Samaritan's Purse
Institute of International
Education
Metropolitan Opera
Association
Susan G. Koman For the Cure
Boys Town
New York Presbyterian Fund
Cystic Fibrosis Foundation
Good360
Catholic Medical Mission
Board
Pew Charitable Trusts
Christian Broadcasting
Network
1,000
350
http://www.directrelief.org/
http://www.pbs.org/
http://www.rescue.org
22
http://www.artic.edu/about/faqs
http://www.samaritanspurse.org
1
52
http://www.iie.org/
http://www.metoperafamily.org/metop
era/
http://ww5.komen.org
http://www.boystown.org/
120
11
https://www.cff.org
http://about.good360.org/
http://www.cmmb.org/
70
35,000
2
http://www.pewtrusts.org/
http://www.cbn.com/
1
1
Appendix E: Calendar of Monthly Marketing Promotions
Better2Gether Donation Preferences Survey Results

2 ibid
3 ibid
4 Roush, Wade. Good2Gether: A Web Widget That Connects Donors to Causes. Xconomy.com. Date accessed: October
17, 2013. http://www.xconomy.com/boston/2008/02/25/good2gether-a-web-widget-that-connects-donors-tocauses/
5 Osborne, Doug. Good2gether connects people, sponsors and media to nonprofits. Geek.com. Date accessed: October
17, 2013. http://www.geek.com/news/good2gether-connects-people-sponsors-and-media-to-nonprofits-573149/
6 Mintel Report: Mobile Payments - US February 2012
7 The Millennial Impact Report 2012
8 Internal Revenue Service Data Book, Internal Revenue Service, 2012
9 The Scope of the Nonprofit Sector Independent Sector, 2010
10 Giving USA Foundation, Giving USA 2013
11 Nonprofit Communication Trends Report, Nonprofit Marketing Guide.com, 2012
12 Ibid
14 Pew Research Center's Pew Internet & American Life Project 2013
15 http://www.forbes.com/sites/skollworldforum/2013/02/22/rise-of-mobile-giving-and-other-trends-inphilanthropy-in-2013/, 10-10-13
16 http://www.forbes.com/sites/skollworldforum/2013/02/22/rise-of-mobile-giving-and-other-trends-inphilanthropy-in-2013/, 10-10-13
17 Real Time Charitable Giving, Pew Research Center's Internet & American life Project
18 Key Facts on U.S. Foundations, Foundation Center, 2013
19 Giving USA report 2013, Market Intelligence for the greater good.
20 Harris-Poll-Charitable-Giving-2010-11-04
21 Ibid
23 ibid
24 ibid
25 The Good Company,The Economist Magazine January 22, 2005.
26 Giving USA report 2013, Market Intelligence for the greater good.
27 Key Facts on U.S. Foundations. Annual report 2012 annually by the Foundation Centers research team.
28 Mintel Report Attitudes Toward Corporate Social Responsibility - US - September 2012.
29 (Smith and Alexandre, 2013) Which CSR-Related Headings Do Fortune 500 Companies Use on Their Websites?.
Business Communication Quarterly,vol. 76 no. 2 155-171.
30 (Esrock and Leichty, 1998) Social responsibility and corporate Web pages: Self-presentation or agenda-setting?
31 Mintel Report Attitudes Toward Corporate Social Responsibility - US - September 2012.
32 Ibid.
33 Crowdfunding Industry Report, Market Trends, Composition and Crowdfunding Platforms, May 2012, Research
Report Abridged Version, www.crowdsourcing.org.
34 Crowdfunding Industry Report, Market Trends, Composition and Crowdfunding Platforms, May 2012, Research
Report Abridged Version, www.crowdsourcing.org, the industry website.
35 Ibid.
36 The Mobile Accord / mGive Story. https://mgive.com/about-us.aspx. Date accessed: October 10, 2013
40 http://mobilegiving.org/?page_id=51. Date accessed: October 10, 2013
41 Choney, Suzanne. Online vs. mobile giving: Which is better?. January 15, 2010. Date accessed: October 13, 2013.
http://www.today.com/id/34881763/ns/today-today_tech/t/online-vs-mobile-giving-which-better/#.UlbrSFBwqh1
42 http://www.mobilecause.com/mobile-giving-stats/. Date accessed: October 10, 2013.
43 http://www.thegivingapp.com/. Date accessed: October 10, 2013
44 http://www.thegivingapp.com/. Date accessed: October 10, 2013.
45William Foster and Gail Fine, How Nonprofits Get Really Big, Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2007.
1
Where is the booming app market going? by Josh Wolonick March 2013 (Accessed 10/15/2013)
(http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/03/07/booming-app-market-minyanville/1970245/).
47 The Nonprofit Almanac 2012. http://nccsdataweb.urban.org/NCCS/extracts/nonprofitalmanacflyerpdf.pdf
48 Ibid
49 Nonprofit Communication Trends Report, Nonprofit Marketing Guide.com, 2012
50 The Nonprofit Starvation Cycle, Stanford Social Innovation Review, 2009
51 Harris Poll Charitable Giving, 11/4/2010
52 2013 Cone Communications Social Impact Study
53 2012 Millennial Impact Report
54 2013 Cone Communications Social Impact Study
55 http://workbar.com/
56 Ibid.
57 https://cloud.google.com/
58 Elizabeth Pope. Fundraising Via Mobile Apps Can Still Be A Challenge. The Non Profit Times. April 1, 2013. Date
Accessed: November 18, 2013.
46

Business Plan: Eduardo Arango, Cortney Cino, Allison Hamilton, Adam Nodiff, Travis Umbleby, Luis de Zengotita

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Business Plan: Eduardo Arango, Cortney Cino, Allison Hamilton, Adam Nodiff, Travis Umbleby, Luis de Zengotita

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

BUSINESS PLAN

November 22, 2013

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 2

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 3

Income Statement ......................................................................................................................................... 42

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 4

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 5

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 6

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 7

Figure 1: DoGood Screenshots

Project Based Small Donation Options: Survey

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 8

DoGood Brings Value to Distinct Audiences

Good2Gether Company Overview

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 9

Strong Intellectual Property

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 10

Industry and Competitive Analysis

The Future of Mobile Giving

This social networking behavior is even more

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 12

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 13

Five Forces Analysis

Figure 5: Five Forces Snapshot

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 15

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 16

mGive/Mobile Giving Foundation- Text to Give

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 17

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 18

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 19

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 20

Figure 7: SWOT Analysis Summary

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 21

The target market over years 1-3 represents 26,880 nonprofit

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 22

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 23

Figure 10: Corporation Segmentation Frame

The target market represents the $24B donations from corporations.

Source: Bloomberg, private calculations.

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 24

Priced to Optimize Use

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 25

Figure 11: Cause Organization Segmentation Frame

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 26

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 27

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 29

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 30

Location for Innovation

Equipment and Technology Utilization

The Right Labor Mix

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 31

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 32

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 33

Flexible Legal Structure

The Management Team

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 34

Ashish Khan - Chief Technology Officer

* Not onboard until Q1, 2015

Chief Sales and

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 35

Roles and Responsibilities of Members of the Organization

DOGOOD GIVE BUSINESS PLAN 36

Good2Gethers Company Culture