Workload
Work through six lessons and six artifacts at your own pace. Completion times and outcomes have not been validated with learners; this is free practice, not a reviewed credential assessment.
Founder & Finance School · Learning track
Funding Readiness
Turn a funding wish into a costed milestone, an eligibility screen, and a reviewable evidence packet.
Start Lesson 1Your learning work, on this device
No signup, cloud storage, cross-device sync or verified completion. Saving is optional. This browser profile is shared with anyone who can use it; private mode, browser cleanup or storage limits may remove work. Use only fictional or non-sensitive material. Export a copy before relying on this device.
Not saved. Worksheets, answers and practice notes currently last only in this tab.
Practice markers are self-reported, never credentials.
A different tab changed this track. Nothing was overwritten. Export your current draft first if needed, then load the saved version before editing and saving again.
01 Learning plan
Know the work.
Produce evidence.
Public foundation 2026.10.08-learning-paths-1 · published 2026-10-08. Independent subject-matter review is pending; paid delivery and credential issuance remain closed. This track is organized around inspectable work, not attendance alone.
Prerequisites
- Basic spreadsheet arithmetic and a willingness to label assumptions
- Use only the fictional case or non-sensitive redacted material
- No financial, legal, or submission authority is conferred by this course
Outputs
- Milestone cash bridge
- Eligibility and freshness matrix
- Financing scenario comparison
- Claim and evidence index
- Application readiness and review checklist
- Decision and obligations register
Demonstrated outcomes
- Calculate an incremental funding gap without double-counting available cash
- Separate eligible, ineligible, unknown, and stale funding leads
- Compare cash timing, repayment, dilution, and obligations under explicit assumptions
- Prepare a traceable readiness packet and human-review handoff
Working vocabulary
- Net proceeds
- Cash received after withheld fees; not necessarily the principal repaid.
- Cash match
- Applicant funding required by a specific notice; eligibility of cash and timing must be checked.
- Reimbursement
- A payment structure where approved eligible costs may be paid after they are incurred; working-capital timing matters.
- Dilution
- A change in ownership proportion; actual effects depend on securities, option pools and terms.
- Eligibility gate
- A required condition checked before ranking or recommending a route.
- Readiness
- Evidence and review preparedness, not approval, funding probability, accreditation or authorization.
02 Public foundation curriculum
Six foundation
learning modules.
Each module states what to understand, what to practice, what evidence to retain, and the criteria for moving forward. The case lab turns those standards into six realistic assignments.
Module 1
Define the milestone and cash need
Objective: Produce a milestone-based funding gap and explain which cash is truly available.
Open Lesson 1: examples, worksheet & feedback →Start with a decision the money makes possible: for this case, producing and testing a pilot batch before larger manufacturing commitments. Write the deliverables, acceptance criteria, owner, and cash timing before choosing a funding product. A budget is a statement of intended uses; a financing request is the portion not covered by funds that are both available and authorized for that purpose. Separate existing obligations and operating reserves from money available for a new milestone. Never count an unsigned expression of interest, hoped-for grant, or anticipated investor conversation as cash.
The four incremental uses total $60,000. A stated 10% planning allowance adds $6,000, so the milestone needs $66,000. The fictional $24,000 cash balance less the proposed $9,000 protected reserve leaves $15,000 available, producing a $51,000 funding gap. That is a scenario, not an approved request: the reserve, scope, estimates, and cash availability still need human review. The $3,000 monthly operating shortfall is a warning, not a second expense to silently add twice. Build a dated cash schedule to show whether the milestone working-capital line already covers a given shortfall. The packet lacks that schedule, so report the uncertainty instead of presenting a precise runway forecast.
Practice
Rebuild the four cost lines, planning allowance, available-cash bridge, and $51,000 gap from F02–F04. Write an alternative that delays tooling; label it a proposal, not an approved saving.
Evidence to keep
A cost bridge with formulas, source IDs, estimate status, reserve assumption, missing cash-timing schedule, and founder/finance-review owner.
Ready to move on when
- The $60,000 subtotal, $6,000 allowance, $15,000 available cash, and $51,000 gap reconcile
- Operating reserve and ordinary cash shortfall are not counted as free cash or double-counted expenses
- Every estimate, proposed scope change, and missing timing record has an explicit status
Module provenance
- Wealth Synergy funding evidence and readiness teaching standardws-funding-evidence-standard · Academy internal operating standard
- Loans — U.S. Small Business Administrationsba-loans · Official guidance
Mapped sections or criteria: Internal milestone cash-gap exercise; lender eligibility remains separate
External authorities, common professional practice, and Academy-selected controls are identified separately. A source supports only the stated scope; it does not convert this lesson into legal, licensed, accredited, or regulatory advice.
Module 2
Screen routes before ranking
Objective: Apply hard eligibility and freshness gates before expressing a preference for a funding route.
Open Lesson 2: examples, worksheet & feedback →A useful screening row records the program, primary notice URL, reviewed date, applicant type, location, permitted use, stage, amount, match, timing, and owner. Use four statuses: pass supported by evidence; fail supported by evidence; unknown because the evidence is missing; and stale because the source needs rechecking. Unknown is not a weak pass. A directory link or a lender name is a discovery lead, not proof that applications are open or that this company qualifies. Preserve why a route was excluded so a later reviewer can reproduce the decision.
In the fictional packet, Grant A may fit location and use but is closed and has a $30,000 cash-match requirement for the proposed award. The available milestone cash is only $15,000, and reimbursement would require the company to bridge eligible costs before payment. Grant B fails applicant type because the company is for-profit. Do not rank either as currently applicable because its advertised maximum is attractive. The loan and equity entries are only simulated routes until provider, eligibility, authority, and terms are verified. On the real Capital Navigator, open the official source and inspect its current notice before moving a result into an application plan; the screening tool cannot confer eligibility.
Practice
Make four rows for A–D. Distinguish disqualifiers from unresolved information and explain what would need to change before each row can advance.
Evidence to keep
An eligibility matrix retaining closed, applicant-type-fail, unknown-terms, and match/timing issues, with official-source verification assigned as a next action.
Ready to move on when
- Grant A remains excluded as closed and its cash match/reimbursement gaps are visible
- Grant B fails applicant type regardless of its maximum award
- Loan/equity entries remain simulations, not verified recommendations
Module provenance
- Grants 101 — Grants.govgrants-101 · Official guidance
- Loans — U.S. Small Business Administrationsba-loans · Official guidance
- Wealth Synergy funding evidence and readiness teaching standardws-funding-evidence-standard · Academy internal operating standard
Mapped sections or criteria: Program-specific eligibility and internal source-led screening
External authorities, common professional practice, and Academy-selected controls are identified separately. A source supports only the stated scope; it does not convert this lesson into legal, licensed, accredited, or regulatory advice.
Module 3
Compare financing economics
Objective: Compare net proceeds, payment burden, and ownership effects without presenting a nominal rate as total cost.
Open Lesson 3: examples, worksheet & feedback →Compare financing on the same decision sheet: gross principal, cash fees, net proceeds, payment dates, total scheduled repayment, collateral or personal exposure, and what happens if sales arrive late. For an ordinary fully amortizing loan, payment is P × r ÷ (1 − (1 + r) to the power of −n), where r is the periodic interest rate and n is the installment count. This formula is not valid for every product. A factor rate, daily withdrawal, variable rate, balloon, or revenue-based share needs its actual cash-flow schedule. A nominal annual rate is not automatically an APR or an all-in comparison.
For fictional Loan C, r = 0.12/12 = 0.01 and n = 36. A $51,000 principal produces a monthly installment of about $1,693.93. The 2% withheld fee is $1,020, so only $49,980 arrives: $1,020 less than the stated $51,000 need. Scheduled repayments total about $60,981.47 using unrounded payments; timing, taxes, and missing terms are not included. The $3,000 ordinary monthly operating deficit means affordability cannot be inferred from this payment calculation. In the simplified equity example, $200,000 divided by the $1,000,000 post-money value is 20% new-investor ownership before excluded instruments and terms. Avoid calling that the actual dilution or a fair price. Finance and legal review are needed before a real commitment.
Practice
Calculate Loan C net proceeds and scheduled installments; compare them with the milestone gap and ordinary cash shortfall. Compute the simplified Equity D ownership percentage and list the omitted terms.
Evidence to keep
A scenario comparison with calculation assumptions, net-cash gap, affordability warning, dilution limitations, and professional-review questions.
Ready to move on when
- The $1,020 fee and $49,980 net proceeds remain separate from interest
- The payment formula states monthly rate and 36 installments; affordability is not asserted
- 20% is identified as a simplified ownership illustration, not complete investor economics
Module provenance
- Loans — U.S. Small Business Administrationsba-loans · Official guidance
- Capital-Raising Building Blocks — SECsec-capital · Official guidance
- Wealth Synergy funding evidence and readiness teaching standardws-funding-evidence-standard · Academy internal operating standard
Mapped sections or criteria: Internal arithmetic exercises; primary guidance identifies loan and securities review boundaries
External authorities, common professional practice, and Academy-selected controls are identified separately. A source supports only the stated scope; it does not convert this lesson into legal, licensed, accredited, or regulatory advice.
Module 4
Build the evidence packet
Objective: Build a least-data evidence index that exposes unsupported claims instead of decorating them.
Open Lesson 4: examples, worksheet & feedback →A readiness packet is an index of claims and their supporting records, not a folder made impressive by its size. Separate entity/ownership records, budget and cash model, customer evidence, technical status, use of funds, and review approvals. For each item record version, source, owner, what it supports, what it does not support, and who is authorized to receive it. Use redacted or fictional material in this public course. A local browser worksheet is not a secure diligence room, and an AI-generated narrative is not new evidence.
F09 supports that eight interviews and one unsigned letter were summarized; it does not support revenue, orders, or permission to name customers. F10 supports an engineering estimate but leaves testing and tooling estimates unquoted. F11 contains three unsupported public-facing assertions. Replace them with bounded statements or remove them, then leave an explicit gap task for the authorized owner. Keep confidential technical material, financial statements, government identifiers, passwords, and personal records out of this public exercise. A later secure application process should collect only records required by a verified recipient and approved purpose.
Practice
Create an evidence index for the three claims in F11 and the budget/customer material in F09–F10. Draft truthful replacements without inventing missing records.
Evidence to keep
A claim-to-source matrix, redaction and access notes, missing-document requests, and a revision log.
Ready to move on when
- Guaranteed revenue, patent protection, and production approval are removed or explicitly unsupported
- Interview summaries are not represented as orders or a validated market
- Sensitive diligence files are named as requirements only, not uploaded or copied into the exercise
Module provenance
- Capital-Raising Building Blocks — SECsec-capital · Official guidance
- Wealth Synergy funding evidence and readiness teaching standardws-funding-evidence-standard · Academy internal operating standard
Mapped sections or criteria: Internal evidence index and minimization controls
External authorities, common professional practice, and Academy-selected controls are identified separately. A source supports only the stated scope; it does not convert this lesson into legal, licensed, accredited, or regulatory advice.
Module 5
Prepare and review the application
Objective: Convert a current notice into a controlled draft and stop before unauthorized submission.
Open Lesson 5: examples, worksheet & feedback →An application plan starts with the current official instructions, not the fields in an old template. Build a compliance matrix linking every required question, attachment, limitation, deadline/timezone, signature, and submission method to an owner and source. Budget, narrative, use of funds, and attachments must agree. Registration and authorized representative steps can take time; record them as dependencies rather than claiming completion. A review gate is a decision with evidence and an accountable approver, not a green box automatically earned by answering a quiz.
The case supplies no live notice or authorized signature, so a real submission cannot be completed. Prepare a training draft with labeled placeholders and a six-week reverse schedule: verify current notice and eligibility first; resolve entity, budget, and cash-timing gaps; review claims and attachments; obtain qualified review and founder authorization; then check the official submission receipt if an authorized real application eventually happens. Do not invent a deadline from the desired schedule. Funding-route screening, human finance/legal review, recipient verification, and deliberate approval must precede any external transmission. Mass applying multiplies privacy exposure and low-fit work instead of fixing eligibility.
Practice
Prepare a requirement-to-evidence checklist and a reverse schedule. Mark the official notice, deadline, identity/authority, and signature gates blocked from the supplied packet.
Evidence to keep
A draft compliance matrix, named review roles, attachment consistency checks, and a clearly unsubmitted handoff.
Ready to move on when
- Current notice, exact deadline and signing authority remain missing rather than guessed
- Draft statements match the cost bridge and evidence index
- The handoff states no submission, outreach, signature or approval occurred
Module provenance
- Grants 101 — Grants.govgrants-101 · Official guidance
- Wealth Synergy funding evidence and readiness teaching standardws-funding-evidence-standard · Academy internal operating standard
Mapped sections or criteria: Pre-award lifecycle and internal authorization gate
External authorities, common professional practice, and Academy-selected controls are identified separately. A source supports only the stated scope; it does not convert this lesson into legal, licensed, accredited, or regulatory advice.
Module 6
Manage decisions and funding obligations
Objective: Maintain a decision and obligations register that separates a lead, application, award, acceptance, and cash receipt.
Open Lesson 6: examples, worksheet & feedback →These are different events: finding a lead; screening it; submitting an authorized application; receiving a decision; accepting binding terms; receiving cash; and complying with continuing obligations. Do not collapse them into funded. An approval may still have conditions, reimbursement timing, milestones, reporting duties, collateral, personal exposure, or restrictions on use. Compare the final terms with the original case for the decision; pause when they change. Rejection or delay should update the cash plan and next action, not trigger uncontrolled repeat submissions.
The case contains no actual application or award, so its register should show training drafts and pending reviews only. For the hypothetical reporting conditions in F14, design a proposed calendar, evidence owner, eligible-cost ledger, and change-approval gate. Mark them learner-designed, not an implemented award system. Revisit the route screen when a notice expires, applicant facts change, costs change, or a provider requests different terms. A useful handoff to Capital Navigator records an evidence-based question and unresolved conditions; it does not claim the tool selected an investor, guaranteed a grant, or approved a loan.
Practice
Build a six-state decision register and a proposed reporting calendar. Write one go/no-go memo explaining why the case is not ready to submit and what evidence would change that decision.
Evidence to keep
A decision log, conditional-obligations calendar, named human-review gate, and next-action memo linked to the relevant lesson outputs.
Ready to move on when
- No application, award, accepted terms, funding receipt or certificate is falsely recorded
- F14 conditions are treated as a simulation with owner and evidence needs
- The next-action memo names decision-changing evidence and preserves the founder’s authority
Module provenance
- Grants 101 — Grants.govgrants-101 · Official guidance
- Capital-Raising Building Blocks — SECsec-capital · Official guidance
- Wealth Synergy funding evidence and readiness teaching standardws-funding-evidence-standard · Academy internal operating standard
Mapped sections or criteria: Award/post-award lifecycle and internal change-control register
External authorities, common professional practice, and Academy-selected controls are identified separately. A source supports only the stated scope; it does not convert this lesson into legal, licensed, accredited, or regulatory advice.
Free operational lesson
A large directory is not a funding strategy.
A useful shortlist starts with what must be funded, when cash is needed, what the applicant can prove, and what obligations the business can carry. Fewer current, suitable leads with visible gaps are more useful than hundreds of unverified names. Work through the fictional Canyon Sensor Works case below; do not apply to any of its simulated programs.
Define the milestone and cash need
Produce the milestone cash bridge. A cost bridge with formulas, source IDs, estimate status, reserve assumption, missing cash-timing schedule, and founder/finance-review owner.
Screen routes before ranking
Produce the eligibility and freshness matrix. An eligibility matrix retaining closed, applicant-type-fail, unknown-terms, and match/timing issues, with official-source verification assigned as a next action.
Compare financing economics
Produce the financing scenario comparison. A scenario comparison with calculation assumptions, net-cash gap, affordability warning, dilution limitations, and professional-review questions.
Build the evidence packet
Produce the claim and evidence index. A claim-to-source matrix, redaction and access notes, missing-document requests, and a revision log.
Prepare and review the application
Produce the application readiness and review checklist. A draft compliance matrix, named review roles, attachment consistency checks, and a clearly unsubmitted handoff.
Manage decisions and funding obligations
Produce the decision and obligations register. A decision log, conditional-obligations calendar, named human-review gate, and next-action memo linked to the relevant lesson outputs.
Worked example
Canyon Sensor Works: a smaller, clearer ask
A fictional founder wants money quickly but has mixed estimates, an ordinary monthly deficit and unverified routes.
Weak approach
Send the same exaggerated deck to every provider, use the largest award amount as the ranking rule, and describe the company as funding-ready.
Stronger approach
Reconcile the $51,000 scenario gap; exclude closed and wrong-applicant programs; identify loan net-proceeds and affordability issues; remove unsupported claims; prepare a no-submission review packet.
Why it matters: Readiness is the ability to show evidence, constraints and a responsible next decision—not a guarantee of funding.
03 Control the work
Spot failure.
Measure the system.
Common failure modes
Ranking before eligibility
A large award cannot cure an applicant-type failure, closed deadline, unavailable match or unsupported use. Preserve exclusions before comparing fit.
Treating proceeds as profit
Debt cash has repayment obligations; equity changes economic rights; restricted grants can impose spending and reporting conditions. Model the actual route.
Inventing evidence to finish a draft
Unknown is a legitimate state. A polished invented order, IP claim, signature or financial statement creates a worse packet than an honest gap.
Operating measures
Evidence coverage
Material application claims with traceable reviewed support divided by material claims.
Use it to decide: Remove or repair unsupported claims before review; do not treat this ratio as probability of approval.
Unresolved gates
Count disqualifiers and unknown material conditions separately.
Use it to decide: Stop an ineligible route; assign a bounded verification action for an unknown one.
Cash-need variance
Net available proceeds minus approved dated funding need under the same scenario.
Use it to decide: Revise scope or financing structure with qualified review if a funding gap remains.
04 · Applied case lab · 2026.10.08-funding-1
Practice on a
messy record.
The packet contains contradiction and incomplete evidence on purpose. Each assignment now identifies the exact fictional inputs available to the learner. Complete a bounded starter, mark missing records instead of inventing them, and compare your reasoning with the debrief—not with a pretend single perfect answer.
Fictional training case. No real company, funder, offer, application, deadline or outcome is represented. Do not submit, contact, sign, upload private records, or treat calculations as financial/legal advice.
FR-CB01 · citable versioned case brief
Canyon Sensor Works — from funding wish to reviewable packet
A Utah industrial-sensor startup wants a pilot milestone funded within six weeks. Its budget contains both estimates and an engineering estimate; ordinary operations consume more cash than they generate. Two simulated grants and two simulated financing structures create tempting but flawed shortcuts. Your job is to produce six traceable artifacts, preserve missing evidence, and prepare a human-review handoff—not to obtain funding.
Timing is not supplied
Judgment required: Reconcile the ordinary monthly shortfall, protected reserve and incremental milestone uses in a dated model before endorsing a request.
Do not assume: The $51,000 scenario is affordable, sufficient on every date, or approved.
A simulated route is not a current offer
Judgment required: Separate the teaching arithmetic from a real provider’s current eligibility and terms.
Do not assume: Any case program exists or any source authority endorses it.
Six module assignments and debriefs
Module 1 · Define the milestone and cash need
Bounded case starter
Rebuild the four cost lines, planning allowance, available-cash bridge, and $51,000 gap from F02–F04. Write an alternative that delays tooling; label it a proposal, not an approved saving.
Deliverable: A cost bridge with formulas, source IDs, estimate status, reserve assumption, missing cash-timing schedule, and founder/finance-review owner.
Completion boundary: Use only the cited fictional inputs. Label estimates, proposals and missing evidence. No real outreach, submission, signature, offer acceptance, data transfer, or credential claim is authorized by this exercise.
Workbook plan: 1 authored artifact with 6 stable practice rows. The download includes a prerequisite check, six-to-eight task-specific operating steps, field-by-field guidance, completed supported and known-gap examples, supporting-artifact examples where authored, stop/go/escalate rules, and an exact completion test.
Provided inputs
- M01-I01 · case-fact · F02
The incremental pilot milestone budgets $18,000 prototype work, $12,000 testing, $20,000 tooling, and $10,000 pilot working capital. These are separate from ordinary monthly operating expenses. - M01-I02 · case-fact · F03
The planning allowance is 10% of the $60,000 incremental milestone budget. Cash in the fictional record is $24,000; the founders propose keeping $9,000 untouched as an operating reserve. No other funds are committed. - M01-I03 · case-fact · F04
Monthly ordinary cash receipts are $6,000 and ordinary cash expenses are $9,000. Receipts are not signed future orders. The case does not supply a month-by-month collection schedule or forecast. - M01-I04 · case-fact · F10
An engineering estimate supports prototype work. Testing and tooling amounts are founder estimates with no supplier quotation or validity date. No independent technical or regulatory review is supplied.
Evidence criteria
- M01-EC01: The $60,000 subtotal, $6,000 allowance, $15,000 available cash, and $51,000 gap reconcile
- M01-EC02: Operating reserve and ordinary cash shortfall are not counted as free cash or double-counted expenses
- M01-EC03: Every estimate, proposed scope change, and missing timing record has an explicit status
Debrief lens: Reconcile the request to one cash bridge: $60,000 of milestone uses plus the $6,000 planning allowance equals $66,000; $24,000 cash less the proposed $9,000 reserve leaves $15,000 available. Show the resulting $51,000 gap in both the budget and narrative. Mark the reserve, estimates and missing cash-timing schedule for finance review, and keep any delayed-tooling alternative separate from the base case.
- The $60,000 subtotal, $6,000 allowance, $15,000 available cash, and $51,000 gap reconcile
- Operating reserve and ordinary cash shortfall are not counted as free cash or double-counted expenses
- Every estimate, proposed scope change, and missing timing record has an explicit status
Module 2 · Screen routes before ranking
Bounded case starter
Make four rows for A–D. Distinguish disqualifiers from unresolved information and explain what would need to change before each row can advance.
Deliverable: An eligibility matrix retaining closed, applicant-type-fail, unknown-terms, and match/timing issues, with official-source verification assigned as a next action.
Completion boundary: Use only the cited fictional inputs. Label estimates, proposals and missing evidence. No real outreach, submission, signature, offer acceptance, data transfer, or credential claim is authorized by this exercise.
Workbook plan: 1 authored artifact with 6 stable practice rows. The download includes a prerequisite check, six-to-eight task-specific operating steps, field-by-field guidance, completed supported and known-gap examples, supporting-artifact examples where authored, stop/go/escalate rules, and an exact completion test.
Provided inputs
- M02-I01 · case-fact · F01
Canyon Sensor Works is a fictional Utah for-profit company developing a non-medical industrial sensor; it has two founders and no institutional investment. Ownership attestations and legal records are not supplied. - M02-I02 · case-fact · F03
The planning allowance is 10% of the $60,000 incremental milestone budget. Cash in the fictional record is $24,000; the founders propose keeping $9,000 untouched as an operating reserve. No other funds are committed. - M02-I03 · case-fact · F05
Training Grant A is fictional: for-profit Utah prototype projects may apply; a 1:1 cash match is required against a $30,000 requested award, with reimbursement after approved costs. Its illustrative application period has closed as of the case review date. - M02-I04 · case-fact · F06
Training Grant B is fictional: only nonprofit applicants qualify. It advertises up to $100,000, but this for-profit company cannot pass that applicant-type gate. - M02-I05 · case-fact · F07
Training Loan C is fictional: $51,000 principal, 36 equal monthly installments, 12% nominal annual interest compounded monthly, and a 2% origination fee withheld from proceeds. No actual offer, lender underwriting, default terms, collateral, or guarantee terms are supplied. - M02-I06 · case-fact · F08
Training Equity D is fictional: $200,000 new cash at an $800,000 pre-money valuation. The simplified example excludes options, convertibles, fees, preferences, taxes, and other investor rights. No investor commitment is supplied. - M02-I07 · case-fact · F12
The team wants to submit in six weeks. The packet has no current program notice, verified deadline/timezone, entity registration proof, authorized signature, tax return, bank statement, or consent to share personal documents.
Evidence criteria
- M02-EC01: Grant A remains excluded as closed and its cash match/reimbursement gaps are visible
- M02-EC02: Grant B fails applicant type regardless of its maximum award
- M02-EC03: Loan/equity entries remain simulations, not verified recommendations
Debrief lens: Compare F01 with each route’s actual eligibility gates before comparing award amounts. Record Grant B as excluded because a for-profit company does not meet its nonprofit-applicant rule. Keep Grant A excluded as closed and document its separate $30,000 match and reimbursement-timing gaps. Leave the simulated loan and equity routes at research-only status until current official instructions and the missing terms are verified.
- Grant A remains excluded as closed and its cash match/reimbursement gaps are visible
- Grant B fails applicant type regardless of its maximum award
- Loan/equity entries remain simulations, not verified recommendations
Module 3 · Compare financing economics
Bounded case starter
Calculate Loan C net proceeds and scheduled installments; compare them with the milestone gap and ordinary cash shortfall. Compute the simplified Equity D ownership percentage and list the omitted terms.
Deliverable: A scenario comparison with calculation assumptions, net-cash gap, affordability warning, dilution limitations, and professional-review questions.
Completion boundary: Use only the cited fictional inputs. Label estimates, proposals and missing evidence. No real outreach, submission, signature, offer acceptance, data transfer, or credential claim is authorized by this exercise.
Workbook plan: 1 authored artifact with 6 stable practice rows. The download includes a prerequisite check, six-to-eight task-specific operating steps, field-by-field guidance, completed supported and known-gap examples, supporting-artifact examples where authored, stop/go/escalate rules, and an exact completion test.
Provided inputs
- M03-I01 · case-fact · F03
The planning allowance is 10% of the $60,000 incremental milestone budget. Cash in the fictional record is $24,000; the founders propose keeping $9,000 untouched as an operating reserve. No other funds are committed. - M03-I02 · case-fact · F04
Monthly ordinary cash receipts are $6,000 and ordinary cash expenses are $9,000. Receipts are not signed future orders. The case does not supply a month-by-month collection schedule or forecast. - M03-I03 · case-fact · F07
Training Loan C is fictional: $51,000 principal, 36 equal monthly installments, 12% nominal annual interest compounded monthly, and a 2% origination fee withheld from proceeds. No actual offer, lender underwriting, default terms, collateral, or guarantee terms are supplied. - M03-I04 · case-fact · F08
Training Equity D is fictional: $200,000 new cash at an $800,000 pre-money valuation. The simplified example excludes options, convertibles, fees, preferences, taxes, and other investor rights. No investor commitment is supplied.
Evidence criteria
- M03-EC01: The $1,020 fee and $49,980 net proceeds remain separate from interest
- M03-EC02: The payment formula states monthly rate and 36 installments; affordability is not asserted
- M03-EC03: 20% is identified as a simplified ownership illustration, not complete investor economics
Debrief lens: Separate the nominal rate from fees: $51,000 × 2% is $1,020 withheld, leaving $49,980 and a $1,020 shortfall against the $51,000 need. Calculate the monthly installment using r = 0.01 and n = 36, about $1,693.93, then compare it with the existing $3,000 operating shortfall instead of asserting affordability. Label 20% equity ownership as a simplified scenario, list the missing loan and ownership terms, and obtain qualified finance and legal review before a real commitment.
- The $1,020 fee and $49,980 net proceeds remain separate from interest
- The payment formula states monthly rate and 36 installments; affordability is not asserted
- 20% is identified as a simplified ownership illustration, not complete investor economics
Module 4 · Build the evidence packet
Bounded case starter
Create an evidence index for the three claims in F11 and the budget/customer material in F09–F10. Draft truthful replacements without inventing missing records.
Deliverable: A claim-to-source matrix, redaction and access notes, missing-document requests, and a revision log.
Completion boundary: Use only the cited fictional inputs. Label estimates, proposals and missing evidence. No real outreach, submission, signature, offer acceptance, data transfer, or credential claim is authorized by this exercise.
Workbook plan: 1 authored artifact with 6 stable practice rows. The download includes a prerequisite check, six-to-eight task-specific operating steps, field-by-field guidance, completed supported and known-gap examples, supporting-artifact examples where authored, stop/go/escalate rules, and an exact completion test.
Provided inputs
- M04-I01 · case-fact · F09
Eight buyer interviews and one unsigned pilot-interest letter are summarized. There are no signed purchase orders, customer quotes approved for publication, or complete interview transcripts. - M04-I02 · case-fact · F10
An engineering estimate supports prototype work. Testing and tooling amounts are founder estimates with no supplier quotation or validity date. No independent technical or regulatory review is supplied. - M04-I03 · case-fact · F11
The founder draft says: guaranteed $1 million revenue next year, patent protected, fully approved for production. None of those assertions is supported by this packet. - M04-I04 · case-fact · F12
The team wants to submit in six weeks. The packet has no current program notice, verified deadline/timezone, entity registration proof, authorized signature, tax return, bank statement, or consent to share personal documents.
Evidence criteria
- M04-EC01: Guaranteed revenue, patent protection, and production approval are removed or explicitly unsupported
- M04-EC02: Interview summaries are not represented as orders or a validated market
- M04-EC03: Sensitive diligence files are named as requirements only, not uploaded or copied into the exercise
Debrief lens: Rewrite the customer claim as early nonbinding interest supported by eight interviews and one unsigned letter, with no signed orders supplied. Remove the unsupported patent-protection, guaranteed-revenue and production-approval assertions. For each claim, record the exact source, what it supports, the missing evidence and the qualified review owner; name sensitive documents as requirements without uploading them into this public exercise.
- Guaranteed revenue, patent protection, and production approval are removed or explicitly unsupported
- Interview summaries are not represented as orders or a validated market
- Sensitive diligence files are named as requirements only, not uploaded or copied into the exercise
Module 5 · Prepare and review the application
Bounded case starter
Prepare a requirement-to-evidence checklist and a reverse schedule. Mark the official notice, deadline, identity/authority, and signature gates blocked from the supplied packet.
Deliverable: A draft compliance matrix, named review roles, attachment consistency checks, and a clearly unsubmitted handoff.
Completion boundary: Use only the cited fictional inputs. Label estimates, proposals and missing evidence. No real outreach, submission, signature, offer acceptance, data transfer, or credential claim is authorized by this exercise.
Workbook plan: 1 authored artifact with 6 stable practice rows. The download includes a prerequisite check, six-to-eight task-specific operating steps, field-by-field guidance, completed supported and known-gap examples, supporting-artifact examples where authored, stop/go/escalate rules, and an exact completion test.
Provided inputs
- M05-I01 · case-fact · F02
The incremental pilot milestone budgets $18,000 prototype work, $12,000 testing, $20,000 tooling, and $10,000 pilot working capital. These are separate from ordinary monthly operating expenses. - M05-I02 · case-fact · F03
The planning allowance is 10% of the $60,000 incremental milestone budget. Cash in the fictional record is $24,000; the founders propose keeping $9,000 untouched as an operating reserve. No other funds are committed. - M05-I03 · case-fact · F11
The founder draft says: guaranteed $1 million revenue next year, patent protected, fully approved for production. None of those assertions is supported by this packet. - M05-I04 · case-fact · F12
The team wants to submit in six weeks. The packet has no current program notice, verified deadline/timezone, entity registration proof, authorized signature, tax return, bank statement, or consent to share personal documents. - M05-I05 · case-fact · F13
Three decisions remain unapproved: reducing the tooling stage, accepting debt, and giving up ownership. The learner has permission to prepare a training draft only, not contact funders, submit, sign, or accept terms.
Evidence criteria
- M05-EC01: Current notice, exact deadline and signing authority remain missing rather than guessed
- M05-EC02: Draft statements match the cost bridge and evidence index
- M05-EC03: The handoff states no submission, outreach, signature or approval occurred
Debrief lens: Label six weeks as an internal planning target, not a verified deadline. Keep the official notice, closing time and signing authority blocked until documented, and map each remaining requirement to an evidence owner and review dependency. Reconcile the narrative and budget to the same $51,000 gap, then deliver an explicitly unsubmitted training draft; no signature, submission or outreach is authorized by this case.
- Current notice, exact deadline and signing authority remain missing rather than guessed
- Draft statements match the cost bridge and evidence index
- The handoff states no submission, outreach, signature or approval occurred
Module 6 · Manage decisions and funding obligations
Bounded case starter
Build a six-state decision register and a proposed reporting calendar. Write one go/no-go memo explaining why the case is not ready to submit and what evidence would change that decision.
Deliverable: A decision log, conditional-obligations calendar, named human-review gate, and next-action memo linked to the relevant lesson outputs.
Completion boundary: Use only the cited fictional inputs. Label estimates, proposals and missing evidence. No real outreach, submission, signature, offer acceptance, data transfer, or credential claim is authorized by this exercise.
Workbook plan: 1 authored artifact with 6 stable practice rows. The download includes a prerequisite check, six-to-eight task-specific operating steps, field-by-field guidance, completed supported and known-gap examples, supporting-artifact examples where authored, stop/go/escalate rules, and an exact completion test.
Provided inputs
- M06-I01 · case-fact · F05
Training Grant A is fictional: for-profit Utah prototype projects may apply; a 1:1 cash match is required against a $30,000 requested award, with reimbursement after approved costs. Its illustrative application period has closed as of the case review date. - M06-I02 · case-fact · F07
Training Loan C is fictional: $51,000 principal, 36 equal monthly installments, 12% nominal annual interest compounded monthly, and a 2% origination fee withheld from proceeds. No actual offer, lender underwriting, default terms, collateral, or guarantee terms are supplied. - M06-I03 · case-fact · F08
Training Equity D is fictional: $200,000 new cash at an $800,000 pre-money valuation. The simplified example excludes options, convertibles, fees, preferences, taxes, and other investor rights. No investor commitment is supplied. - M06-I04 · case-fact · F12
The team wants to submit in six weeks. The packet has no current program notice, verified deadline/timezone, entity registration proof, authorized signature, tax return, bank statement, or consent to share personal documents. - M06-I05 · case-fact · F13
Three decisions remain unapproved: reducing the tooling stage, accepting debt, and giving up ownership. The learner has permission to prepare a training draft only, not contact funders, submit, sign, or accept terms. - M06-I06 · case-fact · F14
A hypothetical award would require eligible-cost evidence, periodic reports, a named reporting owner, and approval before changing scope. These training conditions are not a real award agreement.
Evidence criteria
- M06-EC01: No application, award, accepted terms, funding receipt or certificate is falsely recorded
- M06-EC02: F14 conditions are treated as a simulation with owner and evidence needs
- M06-EC03: The next-action memo names decision-changing evidence and preserves the founder’s authority
Debrief lens: Set the current state to draft only—not submitted—and retain separate future evidence gates for submission, award decision, acceptance and cash receipt. Mark the F14 reporting calendar as a learner proposal with real agreement dates and obligations still unknown. Assign review owners and change triggers, and write a no-submission memo naming the evidence needed before the founder can authorize any real action or spending.
- No application, award, accepted terms, funding receipt or certificate is falsely recorded
- F14 conditions are treated as a simulation with owner and evidence needs
- The next-action memo names decision-changing evidence and preserves the founder’s authority
Self-review standard
Inspect evidence, reasoning, completeness, boundaries, and traceability.
Inspect whether a reviewer can reproduce the calculations and decisions without guessing. An honest blocked route is a valid learning outcome. The downloadable rubric is formative guidance only—not a grade, verified completion, credential assessment, or professional approval.
Loan affordability, cash timing or inconsistent financial records
Route to: Qualified finance/accounting reviewer and actual lender
Learner boundary: The learner prepares calculations; does not approve credit or assert ability to repay.
Equity offering, IP, signatures, guarantees or binding obligations
Route to: Appropriately qualified legal counsel and authorized owner
Learner boundary: No solicitation, legal conclusion, signature or acceptance occurs in this exercise.
Eligibility, match, allowed costs or award reporting uncertainty
Route to: Official program contact or authorized grants professional
Learner boundary: A current official notice and written clarification—not a course example—govern the real decision.
05 Editable working tool
Use the template.
Inspect the example.
Record one material route decision per row, cite the fictional source, and retain the constraint and human-review owner. Use the individual lesson tools for each artifact. Add as many rows as needed, export a CSV, or print only this tool. Entries are not transmitted. They last only in this tab unless you opt into device-only saving in the learning-work panel. No account or cross-device sync is provided.
| Route or decision | Evidence and date | Cash or eligibility effect | Unresolved gap | Owner and next review |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Completed example
- Route or decision
- Training Loan C
- Evidence and date
- F07; fictional case v2026.10.08
- Cash or eligibility effect
- $49,980 net cash against $51,000 scenario need
- Unresolved gap
- $1,020 proceeds gap, affordability, guarantees and actual eligibility unresolved
- Owner and next review
- Founder + finance reviewer; before any real application
Data boundary: Work only in an approved system. Do not place passwords, payment-card data, government identifiers, health information, export-controlled material, client secrets, or unpublished invention details in this public worksheet.
Practice one module.
Get useful feedback now.
Each two-question check works independently. Review any answered question immediately; you do not need to finish all twelve. Feedback is formative, not a verified grade or credential.
07 Sources and handoffs
Verify the standard.
Know when to escalate.
Module provenance distinguishes external authorities, legal-status evidence, and Wealth Synergy internal operating standards. Requirements change; verify current source text and obtain qualified advice when a decision carries legal, financial, technical, employment, safety, or regulatory consequences.
sba-loans · Official guidance
Loans — U.S. Small Business Administration
Official overview of SBA-backed lending and provider-specific eligibility. It does not substantiate the fictional offer, rate or company qualification.
Open reviewed external source ↗grants-101 · Official guidance
Grants 101 — Grants.gov
Primary overview of pre-award, award and post-award lifecycle. Individual notices control eligibility, match, deadlines and reporting; the case programs are invented.
Open reviewed external source ↗sec-capital · Official guidance
Capital-Raising Building Blocks — SEC
SEC staff educational resources on readiness, securities and offering pathways. Staff resources are not legal rules; securities counsel must review an actual offering.
Open reviewed external source ↗ws-funding-evidence-standard · Academy internal operating standard
Wealth Synergy funding evidence and readiness teaching standard
Academy-authored screening, arithmetic, evidence-index, privacy and no-submission exercises. All case rates, company facts and programs are fictional. This is not externally validated instruction or individualized financial/legal advice.
Version 2026.10.08-1 · reviewed 2026-10-08 · owner: Foundry Academy curriculum ownerCapital Navigator
Research routes and inspect current primary-source eligibility. A listing is not an offer, approval, or permission to submit.
Explore the handoff →Inventor Forge
Connect the request to the next validation, engineering, sourcing or launch milestone.
Explore the handoff →Mountain Top Talent — employer support
Explore operational delegation needs separately from learner assessment or funding decisions.
Explore the handoff →Future facilitated pathway · not open
Practice with feedback.
Finish with evidence.
The public case lab is available now. A future facilitated cohort may add assignments, feedback, and human capstone review only after a named qualified facilitator and reviewer, schedule, rubric, privacy controls, support, price, refund terms, and delivery terms are published in writing. No enrollment or payment is accepted here.
Clear boundaries.
Course material supports professional development. It does not replace legal, tax, accounting, cybersecurity, engineering, regulatory, employment, translation, or other qualified professional advice where that expertise is required.
The public knowledge check and portal review markers are learning aids only. They do not award a credential. Pilot curriculum and credential assessment are in quality review; Foundry Academy is not currently representing these pages as accredited instruction or an automatic path to a certificate.
Participation does not guarantee employment, client work, funding, licensure, certification by a public authority, or any business outcome.
Use the public foundation
Read. Practice.
Inspect your evidence.
All public materials and case files are available without enrollment. A fit conversation is non-binding and does not reserve a place in a future pilot.
Ask about this track