Sample blueprint · prepared for the 2026 ESO Summit · Indianapolis, November 10, 2026
Crossroads Venture Network is a made-up five-county entrepreneurial support organization with an executive team of five. Each leader submitted five use cases, some about running the organization and some about serving founders. This page scores every one on a five-part rubric built for ESOs, places each on a four-quadrant map, and sequences the work across 2027 so the leadership team can set AI policy, governance and timing in one sitting.
01 / The signal
Read one at a time, twenty-five wishes. Grouped by the problem underneath, seven programs. The largest cluster was reporting: four of five leaders described rewriting the same facts for a board, a funder or a partner. Close behind were founder coaching and the question of where do I go and what applies to me, asked of a staff member every time.
Programs by number of use cases (bar), count and average score (right)
The clearest signal
Five use cases from four seats are the same job: take one set of quarterly facts and write it for a board, four funders and the public. One Project with the agreed outcome definitions serves all of them.
The founder-facing signal
A resource navigator agent, mentor matching with reasons and referral notes are the same product viewed from three seats. That product is what Crossroads would offer founders next.
The quiet signal
16 of 25 use cases touch founder names, pipelines or agreements. The policy page in section 06 unlocks more use cases than any software decision.
By type
11 strategic. 14 tactical.
Strategic changes how Crossroads decides, serves or organizes. Tactical returns hours to one person each week.
By readiness
14 run today. 11 wait on a gate.
14 need only chat and Projects with Green or masked Yellow data. 7 reach full value with connected email, calendar and CRM; 4 need a scheduled task or an agent build.
Inside and outside
15 inside. 10 outside.
Inside: the tools the team uses to run programs, report and decide. Outside: the services founders receive, made better or new.
What nobody submitted
Front desk. Mentors.
No use case came from intake staff, volunteer coordinators or the mentors themselves. The second wave should ask them.
02 / The rubric
The rubric follows the model BiG uses with manufacturing and utility clients, re-cut for an organization whose product is trust with founders and funders. Value became Founder and Funder Value. Matrix Enablement became Mission Reach: how many founders, partners or counties one use case touches. Readiness folds in whether the capability the use case needs is switched on today. Weights: 35 / 15 / 20 / 20 / 10.
| Dimension | 1 to 3 | 4 to 6 | 7 to 8 | 9 to 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value · 35% | Saves one person a few hours. | A team or a recurring cycle gets faster or more consistent. | Changes a funding, program or partnership decision, or what founders receive. | Frees capacity across the organization or creates a service founders did not have. |
| Mission reach · 15% | Personal. | One department or one program. | Shared across programs or with partners. | Every founder in the region, or decides who decides. |
| Readiness · 20% | Needs an agent build, automation or Red data. | Full value needs connected email, calendar or CRM. | Masked Yellow data in chat or a Project. | Green data in chat or a Project, on today. |
| Effort · 20%, inverse | One person, one chat. | A Project with two or three reviewers. | Inputs from every program, counsel or auditor sign-off. | Process redesign plus a build. |
| Risk · 10%, inverse | Own notes, Green. | Masked Yellow with a named reviewer. | Funder reporting, admissions, HR or legal exposure. | Output reaches founders, lenders or auditors directly, or a system acts on it. |
Effort ≤ 5 and Value ≥ 6. Run it now. Build credibility and evidence; harden the masking habit.
Effort > 5 and Value ≥ 6. Sequence it. Multi-quarter, stage-gated, with counsel, a funder or a partner in the path.
Effort ≤ 5 and Value < 6. Self-serve for power users. Cheap, low risk, no program management.
Effort > 5 and Value < 6. Avoid unless a partner cuts the effort. Crossroads has none.
03 / The quadrant
Effort runs left to right; value runs bottom to top. Color is the quarter in which the use case reaches full value: teal runs today, gold waits on connected email, calendar and CRM, red waits on a scheduled task or an agent build. Circles are strategic; squares are tactical. Size is the composite score. Hover or tap a shape to read it; click it for the full write-up.
04 / Strategic and tactical
The split uses each leader's own classification. Strategic work changes how Crossroads decides, serves or organizes and usually needs a sponsor and a second reviewer. Tactical work returns hours to one person every week and can run on self-serve rules. Both belong in the plan; they are governed differently.
Worth a second look
Submitted as strategic, and it is, but the risk score is the point. An AI score that influences who gets into a program is an equity decision. It runs only as an advisory score with the gap between AI and human readers logged and reviewed.
Worth a second look
The highest mission reach on the page and the lowest readiness. It is the first outside service Crossroads would offer with AI, and it waits for the directory to be cleaned and the policy to be adopted. That is the right order.
| # | Use case | Seat | Type | Program | V | M | R | E | K | Score | Quadrant | Unlock | Start |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | AI use policy and governance charter first draft | ED | Strategic | P5 Policy and governance | 8 | 10 | 9 | 4 | 3 | 83 | Quick Win | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 16 | Referral match note and warm introduction | ECO | Tactical | P3 Founder self-service | 7 | 7 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 79 | Quick Win | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 6 | Founder session recap and next steps | PRG | Tactical | P2 Founder coaching | 7 | 6 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 78 | Quick Win | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 3 | Strategic plan scenario memos | ED | Strategic | P1 Strategy and capacity | 9 | 9 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 74 | Strategic Bet | Q2 gate | Q2 2027 |
| 2 | Funder and legislator talking points by audience | ED | Tactical | P7 Ecosystem voice | 5 | 6 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 72 | Fill-In | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 7 | Cohort application screening against the rubric | PRG | Strategic | P2 Founder coaching | 8 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 6 | 72 | Quick Win | Q2 gate | Q2 2027 |
| 11 | Loan readiness checklist and gap letter | CAP | Tactical | P4 Capital readiness | 7 | 6 | 8 | 3 | 5 | 72 | Quick Win | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 13 | Investor pitch feedback at founder pace | CAP | Tactical | P2 Founder coaching | 6 | 5 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 72 | Quick Win | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 18 | Event recap and partner follow-up pack | ECO | Tactical | P7 Ecosystem voice | 5 | 6 | 9 | 2 | 2 | 72 | Fill-In | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 20 | Regional ecosystem map and gap analysis | ECO | Strategic | P1 Strategy and capacity | 8 | 9 | 6 | 6 | 3 | 72 | Strategic Bet | Q2 gate | Q2 2027 |
| 23 | Outcomes dashboard narrative | OPS | Strategic | P6 Reporting and funder confidence | 8 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 3 | 72 | Quick Win | Q2 gate | Q2 2027 |
| 12 | Grant opportunity match against the founder pipeline | CAP | Strategic | P4 Capital readiness | 8 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 71 | Quick Win | Q2 gate | Q2 2027 |
| 8 | Workshop curriculum refresh from feedback | PRG | Tactical | P2 Founder coaching | 5 | 6 | 9 | 3 | 2 | 70 | Fill-In | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 10 | Program report narrative for the quarterly funder report | PRG | Tactical | P6 Reporting and funder confidence | 6 | 6 | 8 | 3 | 3 | 70 | Quick Win | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 17 | Mentor matching with reasons | ECO | Strategic | P3 Founder self-service | 8 | 8 | 6 | 5 | 5 | 70 | Quick Win | Q2 gate | Q2 2027 |
| 21 | Grant compliance checklist and reporting calendar | OPS | Tactical | P6 Reporting and funder confidence | 6 | 7 | 8 | 3 | 5 | 70 | Quick Win | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 1 | Board packet first draft from the quarterly numbers | ED | Tactical | P6 Reporting and funder confidence | 6 | 5 | 8 | 3 | 3 | 68 | Quick Win | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 4 | Ecosystem signal digest: policy, funding and peer programs | ED | Strategic | P7 Ecosystem voice | 7 | 8 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 68 | Quick Win | Q3 gate | Q3 2027 |
| 14 | Lender and CDFI partner briefing | CAP | Tactical | P4 Capital readiness | 5 | 7 | 8 | 3 | 3 | 68 | Fill-In | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 9 | Founder resource navigator agent (pilot) | PRG | Strategic | P3 Founder self-service | 9 | 9 | 4 | 7 | 5 | 67 | Strategic Bet | Q3 gate | Q3 2027 |
| 24 | Staff policy and handbook answers | OPS | Tactical | P5 Policy and governance | 4 | 6 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 67 | Fill-In | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 15 | Capital program design: what a revolving micro-loan would need | CAP | Strategic | P1 Strategy and capacity | 9 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 6 | 64 | Strategic Bet | Q3 gate | Q3 2027 |
| 22 | CRM data hygiene review | OPS | Tactical | P5 Policy and governance | 5 | 7 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 61 | Fill-In | Q2 gate | Q2 2027 |
| 19 | Partner MOU and renewal tracker summaries | ECO | Tactical | P6 Reporting and funder confidence | 4 | 6 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 60 | Fill-In | Runs today | Q1 2027 |
| 25 | Audit and single-audit preparation | OPS | Strategic | P5 Policy and governance | 7 | 7 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 57 | Strategic Bet | Q3 gate | Q3 2027 |
V value · M mission reach · R readiness · E effort (lower is better) · K risk (lower is better). Click a row to read it.
05 / The team
In a seat-by-seat model each leader builds a private Project and the organization drifts into five ways of writing the same report. In a shared model one Project per program holds the method, each seat contributes its inputs, and every funder reads the same numbers. Three design choices make the difference.
Maya Okafor · Board, funders, strategy, public voice
Luis Herrera · Cohorts, workshops, coaching, curriculum
Dana Whitfield · Loan readiness, grants, investor prep
Priya Raman · Referrals, mentors, partners, events
Tom Baxter · Grant compliance, reporting, CRM, HR
Design choice 1
Programs P1 through P7 each get a shared Project with the template, the masking guide and the named reviewer in its instructions. The Executive Director's board packet and the Operations outcomes narrative run in the same place.
Design choice 2
Founders are referenced by code in every tool until a human adds the name in the CRM. Financial statements, loan applications and personal data never enter a chat. The rule is one page and it is in every Project's instructions.
Design choice 3
The five submitters are the first power users. From staff, pick two more: one coach and one intake or operations person. They carry the habit to the people who were not in the room, including the mentors.
Why this matters for the mission
Capacity got cheap. Trust didn't.
The Executive Director's thesis is that AI lets a five-person team serve more founders without adding a sixth, and report to funders without losing a week each quarter. Thirteen use cases speak to that directly. Two owners warned that staff will hear it as fewer coaches. The policy answer is a sentence the ED says out loud and the committee repeats: more founders served with the team we have. Never fewer people.
06 / Policy and governance
The submissions used a shared vocabulary: Green, Yellow and Red data; a named human check; a short pilot with a stop condition; capabilities that are on today and capabilities that wait. The policy below writes those habits down so they survive staff turnover and a new board chair.
Public information, the resource directory, program templates, a leader's own notes and drafts, approved impact numbers, role titles instead of names.
Allowed today in chat and Projects for everyone with a license. Named in 25 of 25 use cases.
Founder pipelines, session notes, applications and partner agreements with names, addresses and dollar amounts replaced by codes or bands. Survey comments with identifying details removed.
Allowed with the masking guide and a named reviewer. Publish the guide in the first month. Named in 16 of 25 use cases.
Founder financial statements, loan and grant applications as submitted, personal identifiers, staff pay and performance, funder contract text, bank and ledger exports, anything covered by a data-sharing agreement.
Stays out until the committee rules otherwise, and then only in a system the organization controls. Excluded by name in 10 use cases.
The capability ladder is the governance lever
Body 1 · monthly
Chair: Executive Director. Members: Director of Operations and Finance (controls and cost), Director of Programs (founder experience), one board member, counsel on call. Rules on Yellow versus Red, approves each rung, reviews usage and cost, hears every stopped pilot.
Body 2 · every two weeks
The five submitters plus two Centers of Influence. Owns the shared Projects, the masking guide and the templates. Reports pilot results against baselines and stop conditions.
Body 3 · continuous
One coach and one operations person. They onboard the second wave (intake, volunteers, mentors), hold office hours, and are the first call when someone is unsure whether a dataset is Yellow or Red.
07 / The three quarters
Each quarter has a theme, a capability rung, a set of pilots and a gate decision the committee makes before the next quarter opens. 14 use cases start in Q1; 7 more in Q2; Q3 is when the scheduled and founder-facing versions switch on. Nothing starts without an owner, a baseline, a review date and a stop condition.
Q1 2027
Chat and Projects only. Green now; Yellow once the masking guide ships in week four. Seven program pilots, two weeks each. Self-serve fill-ins for the power users.
Q2 2027
Connected email, calendar and CRM for a named pilot group: the five leaders and the two Centers of Influence, with access logging. Shared Projects per program. Outcome definitions agreed with the board.
Q3 2027
Scheduled tasks for Green-only workloads. The founder resource navigator agent in a controlled pilot with two partner organizations. The Red-data decision for CRM and finance, informed by the Q2 log.
Gate 1 · end of March
Decision: turn on connected email, calendar and CRM for the pilot group.
Gate 2 · end of June
Decision: scheduled tasks for Green workloads; navigator agent pilot scope.
Gate 3 · end of September
Decision: Red-data policy for CRM and finance; H2 roadmap.
08 / Measures
Every submission named its own baseline and target. The committee needs six numbers that roll those up. All are estimates until the week-one baselines are recorded.
Hours
Summed from the pilot logs. The tactical use cases alone claim roughly 18 hours per week across the five leaders; reporting claims a week per quarter.
Founders
The number founders feel. Measured from the CRM, before and after the navigator and the referral notes.
Funders
One number for four funders and the board. The reporting program lives or dies on it.
Adoption
Light, Medium and Heavy per user. A seat that goes quiet is a Center of Influence problem, not a tool problem.
Incidents
Self-reported under the stop conditions. The target is zero; the useful number is how fast one is caught.
Stops
A stopped pilot is a governance success. Report the stops with the wins.
09 / Method
For a real organization, each leader runs the use case generator at usecase.bigimpactgroup.ai and submits five to ten use cases. BiG reads every submission in full, records the owner's own problem statement, the data it touches, the time estimate and the human check, scores all of them on the five dimensions with one reviewer, and groups them into programs by the problem underneath. Start quarters follow three constraints: the capability each use case needs, the gate decisions, and the calendar the organization already keeps for board meetings, funder reports and cohort launches.
Lineage. Hoosier Energy AI Use Case Prioritization (April 2026). Super Radiator Coils AI Use Case Blueprint (October 2026). Crossroads sample: Value 35%, Mission Reach 15%, Readiness 20%, Effort 20% inverse, Risk 10% inverse.
Crossroads Venture Network, its staff and its numbers are invented for this sample. Any resemblance to a real organization is coincidence. Time savings in a real blueprint are the submitters' estimates and are labeled as such.
For ESO Summit attendees
Run the generator, submit your use cases, and book a free 30-minute use case strategy review. We will tell you which three we would pilot first and what each would take. The booking link is on the takeaway page.