Source document: 06_Trustees_Planning_Pack.docx
Trustees Planning Pack
xTend Prosthetics
Trustees Planning Pack
Forward-looking funding and operating plan
Prepared from documents in the workspace folder.
No historical actuals were available; nothing in this pack invents them.
16 May 2026
Contents
1. What we know from the source documents
2. Unit economics — cost per arm
3. Equipment and capacity-build costs
4. Grant pipeline
5. Funding plan scenarios
6. Impact measurement framework
7. Risk and key person dependencies
8. Open questions for trustees
1. What we know from the source documents
This pack is drawn entirely from four documents in the workspace folder: 'P2 - FUNDING ESTIMATION_.xlsx', 'GRANTS FOR XTEND.xlsx', 'XTend Model for Impacts vs Costs.docx', and 'HY - CV - GS Client Solutions _ Sales.docx'. We have not invented any historical financial figures — none were available in the source.
Confirmed facts
xTend was founded in August 2023 to deliver 3D-printed prosthetic arms in under-served regions.
One arm has been delivered to date: a double amputee in Ksar el Kebir, Morocco, within approximately six months of founding.
Pre-seed funding has been secured from a Fortune-100 executive (amount not disclosed in source documents).
A partnership exists with the Gambian Paralympic Team.
xTend has identified 14 potential UK trust and foundation funders with combined stated amounts of approximately £93,500.
Cost per delivered basic arm is £91 (materials £46 + delivery £45) per the P2 funding-estimation file.
Cost per delivered Phase-2 bionic arm is £158 (components £130 + delivery £40 + £133 one-time tooling per rotation).
Phase-1 reusable equipment cost is £1,046; a full capacity build is £3,378.
The CV cites a 700% cost reduction vs the NHS comparator of approximately £2,600 per arm.
Important note on what is NOT in the source
There are no historical financial statements (Statement of Activities, Balance Sheet, or Cash Flow), no donor list with amounts, no actual fundraising income, no bank balances, and no past expenditure figures in any of the four source files. Any document purporting to show these figures would be invented. This pack is therefore framed as a forward-looking plan, not a year-end report.
2. Unit Economics — Cost per Arm
All cost values below are lifted directly from the 'P2 - FUNDING ESTIMATION' workbook.
Basic 3D-printed arm
| Component | Qty | PPU (£) | Total (£) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3D printer filament (500g spool) | 1 | £15 | £15 |
| P35–P40 addition-cured silicone (40g) | — | £15 | £15 |
| 2mm neoprene (wetsuit material) | 1 | £5 | £5 |
| Velcro straps | 5 | £7 | £7 |
| Super glue gel | 1 | £4 | £4 |
| Materials sub-total | £46 | ||
| Transportation and delivery | 1 | £45 | £45 |
| TOTAL DELIVERED COST PER BASIC ARM | £91 |
Source: P2 - FUNDING ESTIMATION_.xlsx, sheet 'BASIC MATERIALS + PHASE 1 COSTS', rows 13–23.
Phase-2 bionic arm
Per-arm bionic cost is £158 (Sony NPF batteries + charger, Arduino Nano, servo driver, plus £40 delivery). A one-time £133 in operational tooling (Kevlar fibre string, metal tubing, nylon-carbon filament, servo tester, BEC board, PTFE tubing, electric drill, hacksaw, files, battery trays) is also required per source. The 'one rotation' figure including operational tools and one unusable prototype is £1,036.
Source: P2 - FUNDING ESTIMATION_.xlsx, sheet 'PROTOTYPING AND PHASE 2 COSTS'.
Comparison with NHS
| xTend basic | xTend bionic | NHS comparator | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Delivered cost per arm | £91 | £158 | £2,600 |
| Cost ratio (xTend ÷ NHS) | 3.5% | 6.1% | 100.0% |
| Multiple cheaper than NHS | 28.6× | 16.5× | — |
Source: NHS figure from HY CV; xTend figures from the P2 file.
3. Equipment and Capacity-Build Costs
xTend has two clearly costed stages of equipment investment in the source file.
Phase 1 — current operating setup: £1,046 (one-time)
Two CR-10 Smart Pro printers (one new at £200, one used at £165), one Bamboo P1S at £600, plus tools, paint, screws, PE braided line, and cable cutters. This is the kit that was used to deliver the Morocco arm.
Capacity build — expansion: £3,378 (one-time)
Additional equipment of £2,463 (2× CR-10 Smart Pro, 3× Bamboo P1S, additional tool sets, materials) plus a £915 prototyping rotation (initial material costs, five bionic-arm builds at £133 each, and £40 each in transport). This is what's needed to move from one-at-a-time deliveries to a continuous-flow production cell.
Source: P2 - FUNDING ESTIMATION_.xlsx, sheet 'CAPACITY BUILDING', rows 2–20.
4. Grant Pipeline
xTend has identified 14 UK trusts and foundations. Every one is currently in 'NOT SENT' status in the source workbook, except Taylor Family Foundation which is marked APPLIED in the row header. Total stated funding ceiling is approximately £93,500 (excluding 'no min/no max' and 'unlimited' lines).
Pipeline summary
| Funder | Stated amount | Due date / window | Owner | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The February Foundation | £5,000 (avg) | Permanently open | DAVID | Not sent |
| Hargreaves Foundation (sports only) | Need-based | Permanently open | DAVID | Not sent |
| Oak Trust | £250–£4,000 | April 1st | DAVID | Not sent |
| Wolfson Foundation | Min £25,000 | 5 January | DAVID | Not sent |
| James Tutor | £9,500 (avg) | 15 Nov (Rd 1) | DAVID | Not sent |
| Edward Gosling Foundation | £5,000 | — | Lia | Not sent |
| The Westham House Fund | £500–£10,000 | 30 Apr 2024 | Lia | Not sent |
| Bailey Thomas Charitable Fund | Max £9,000 | 1 Dec | Lia | Not sent |
| Ann Rylands Small Donations | £1,500 | Open now | Lia | Not sent |
| Anton Jurgens Charitable Trust | £10,000 | Permanently open | Lia | Not sent |
| The Grocers' Charity | Up to £5,000 | 9 Jan 2026 | Gonzalo | Not sent |
| Barbara Ward Children's Foundation | No min/max | Rolling | JY | Not sent |
| Taylor Family Foundation | No min/max | Rolling | JY | Applied |
| James Tudor Foundation | £1k–£30k | — | JY | Ineligible (per source) |
Source: GRANTS FOR XTEND.xlsx — transcribed verbatim.
Pipeline read
Three funders explicitly require a 'registered health charity' (Wolfson, James Tutor) or registered status (Bailey Thomas). Charity-registration progress is the unlock for the largest grants.
Wolfson's £25k minimum is the single largest gateway. Aimed at the 5 January cycle, this would close the funding gap for a 50-arm + bionic year on its own.
James Tudor is marked 'Ineligible' in the source — do not progress.
Several funders (Anton Jurgens, Bailey Thomas, the February Foundation) are 'permanently open'. These should be the highest near-term priority because there is no calendar pressure to delay.
Application owners are well distributed — DAVID (5), Lia (5), JY (3), Gonzalo (1) — but no grant has been submitted at the time of this pack. That is the single most actionable item.
5. Funding Plan Scenarios
Using only the unit economics from the source workbook (£91 per basic arm, £158 per bionic arm, £1,046 Phase 1 equipment, £3,378 capacity build), four scenarios show what funding xTend would need to raise to hit each delivery target.
| A: Steady | B: Build | C: Wolfson | D: Stretch | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Basic arms delivered | 10 | 30 | 50 | 100 |
| Bionic arms delivered | 0 | 5 | 10 | 20 |
| Equipment investment | £1,046 | £3,378 | £3,378 | £3,378 |
| Materials & delivery — basic | £910 | £2,730 | £4,550 | £9,100 |
| Components & delivery — bionic | £0 | £790 | £1,580 | £3,160 |
| Phase 2 tooling (if any bionic) | £0 | £133 | £133 | £133 |
| TOTAL FUNDING REQUIRED | £1,956 | £7,031 | £9,641 | £15,771 |
| Arms delivered (total) | 10 | 35 | 60 | 120 |
| NHS equivalent cost avoided | £24,044 | £83,969 | £146,359 | £296,229 |
All figures computed from confirmed unit economics. NHS equivalent uses (arms × £2,600 − xTend cost). These figures do not include staff costs, governance costs, or fundraising costs — they are purely the cost of programme delivery.
Implication
Even Scenario D (120 arms, including the full capacity build) is achievable with a single Wolfson grant (£25,000) — with substantial change left over for staff and overhead. The binding constraint is not money; it is (i) charity registration unlocking the largest funders, and (ii) submitting any grants at all — 13 of 14 are currently 'not sent'.
6. Impact Measurement Framework
The 'XTend Model for Impacts vs Costs.docx' file lays out a six-step methodology: define economic impact on the patient (earning potential, productivity); assess health benefits (healthcare cost savings, physical and mental health); measure social outcomes (social integration); evaluate quality of life (QALYs); build a functional impact model with scenarios and sensitivity; and aggregate and report.
Crucially, no numerical inputs are provided in the source document — the methodology is intentionally a framework awaiting field data. The accompanying workbook in this pack ('05_Impact_Measurement_Framework.xlsx') encodes the methodology, provides a pre/post participant survey template, and a calculation sheet with cells left empty pending data.
Trustee asks on impact:
Resource a master's-level researcher (the source doc references this) to design and administer the participant survey.
Decide on a willingness-to-pay threshold for QALYs (UK NICE convention is £20k–£30k; the local-context threshold will be lower and should be debated).
Set a target sample size and follow-up cadence (e.g. 12 baseline interviews per delivery cohort, six-month and twelve-month follow-up).
7. Risk and Key-Person Dependencies
Visible risks from the source documents:
Key-person dependency on the founder. The CV references managing five functional areas personally and 'multiple 100-hour weeks'. There is no salaried backup. Single point of failure on operations, fundraising, technical and outreach.
Founder is in full-time university studies (SOAS BSc Politics, Philosophy and Economics, 2024–2027). Capacity is bounded; trustee oversight of workload and burnout signals matters.
No charity registration referenced in the source documents — this is the binding constraint on the largest grants (Wolfson, James Tutor's 'registered health charity' requirement, Bailey Thomas).
Single confirmed delivery to date. Programme replication risk: the Morocco delivery succeeded but is n=1; the methodology for repeatable delivery in The Gambia and elsewhere is still being built.
FX exposure on field operations in Morocco (MAD) and The Gambia (GMD). Small absolute size today, but worth setting policy now.
No financial records or controls referenced in source. Trustees should commission a basic bookkeeping system, monthly bank reconciliation, and dual signatory on payments before the first grant tranche arrives.
8. Open Questions for Trustees
The following are direct questions for the next trustees meeting, derived from gaps in the source documents:
What is the current cash balance, and where is it held?
How much pre-seed funding was received from the Fortune-100 executive, on what terms, and is there a follow-on commitment?
Is xTend currently a registered charity, a CIC, a charitable trust, or unincorporated? What is the registration roadmap?
What is the agreed plan for charity registration, and who is leading it?
Which of the 14 identified grants should be submitted first, and by what date?
Is there a reserves target the trustees would adopt (e.g. six months of operating cost)?
Should the founder receive a stipend in the next financial year, and at what level?
What is the agreed delivery target for the coming year — Scenario A, B, C or D — and who will be accountable?
Who will be responsible for monthly bookkeeping, and what software (e.g. QuickBooks Online, Xero, FreeAgent) will be used?
Should a finance-experienced trustee be recruited to chair a Finance & Audit subcommittee?
Appendix — Files in this pack
01_Cost_and_Unit_Economics.xlsx — Phase 1 equipment, per-arm materials and delivery, Phase 2 bionic, capacity build, NHS comparison, source index.
02_Grant_Pipeline.xlsx — All 14 funders transcribed verbatim, pipeline-math probability-weighted, what-each-grant-would-fund.
03_Funding_Plan_Scenarios.xlsx — Four scenarios driven by confirmed unit economics.
04_Budget_and_Tracking_Templates.xlsx — Blank income, expense, delivery, cash-position, budget vs actual, and reserve-policy templates ready to be populated as actuals are recorded.
05_Impact_Measurement_Framework.xlsx — Methodology from the source impact doc, blank participant survey, impact-calculation template, cost-function optimisation notes.
06_Trustees_Planning_Pack.docx — this document.
07_Funder_Pitch_Memo.docx — single-page funder summary.