Impact & KPIs¶

This page documents Second Boot's measurement approach and Year 1 targets. The honest framing matters:

Year 1 numbers are planning hypotheses, not commitments

[HYPOTHESIS] All Year 1 targets below are planning goals derived from blueprint estimates. They are not promises to funders, not predictions, and not validated yields. They represent what a successful first year could look like at the scale the program is designed for. Real outcomes will be measured against these targets and reported honestly — including when the program falls short.

Year 1 targets¶

Metric	Year 1 target	Status
Laptops collected & processed	100	`[HYPOTHESIS]`
Devices awarded to graduates	75	`[HYPOTHESIS]`
Participants enrolled in seminars	150+	`[HYPOTHESIS]`
Partner organizations active	6	`[HYPOTHESIS]`
Graduation ceremonies held	4 (quarterly)	`[HYPOTHESIS]`
Marginalized workers trained in hardware tech	10+	`[HYPOTHESIS]`

The 75/100 ratio is intentional: not every donated device becomes an award unit. Some are parts-donors, some are non-recoverable, some become loaners or training units. A 75% award yield from donations is the planning hypothesis; actual yield will depend on donor mix and device quality.

The 150/75 ratio is also intentional: not every enrolled participant completes a track. Some take a module or two without finishing, some hit life events that interrupt them, some test out and come back later. A 50% completion-to-enrollment ratio is the planning hypothesis.

What we will actually measure¶

Beyond the headline numbers, Second Boot tracks:

Pipeline metrics (operational)¶

Devices received per month, by donor type
Triage outcomes (A / B / C grade distribution)
Repair pipeline cycle time (collection to award-ready)
Per-device wipe certificate issued (target: 100% of devices containing data)
Device disposition (awarded / parts / recycled)

Cohort metrics (program)¶

Enrollment per cohort, by partner and audience
Session attendance rates
Module completion rates
Track completion rates (Starter / Full / Youth / Seniors / Mentor Grad)
Time to completion per track

Workforce metrics (people)¶

Hardware Trainees enrolled
Trainees who reach paid status
Trainees who exit to external employment
Peer Instructors trained
Peer Instructors actively teaching

Follow-up metrics (outcomes)¶

These are the metrics that matter most and are also the hardest to measure honestly. Approach:

3-month post-award check-in — Is the device working? Is it being used? What problems came up?
6-month post-award follow-up — Voluntary; brief survey on confidence, skills used, employment status (where relevant)
12-month alumni event — Annual gathering for graduates; informal data on long-term impact

[HYPOTHESIS] Self-reported outcomes from these follow-ups will tend to overstate program benefit (response bias — people who had positive experiences are more likely to respond). Acknowledge this in any reporting. Where possible, supplement with partner-org data (employment placements through partners, etc.) for cross-validation.

What we will not measure (or claim)¶

"Lives changed" — not a measurable claim, do not put it in funder materials
Recovery outcomes — Second Boot is not a recovery program; we do not measure relapse rates or claim contribution
Recidivism reduction — Second Boot is not a reentry program in the criminological sense; we do not claim contribution to recidivism reduction without longitudinal partnership with researchers who can actually measure it
Income increase — too many confounding variables; we measure employment placements where they happen, without claiming Second Boot caused them
Health outcomes — outside scope

The Epistemic Honesty directive applies most strongly here: Second Boot's failure mode is overclaiming benefit to vulnerable populations in funder applications. Discipline at the measurement layer is the first defense against that.

Measurement methods¶

Method	Used for	Limitations
Internal database	Pipeline + cohort metrics	Trustworthy if discipline holds; depends on intake staff entering data consistently
Facilitator session notes	Cohort engagement	Subjective; helpful for adjustment but not for external reporting
Post-cohort participant survey (optional)	Confidence, skills used	Self-report bias; response bias
Partner organization data	Cross-validation	Available only where partner systems exist and partners are willing
12-month alumni event	Long-term informal check	Voluntary attendance; not representative

Reporting cadence¶

Internal: Monthly to the BNI Foundation board and operational leads
Partners: Quarterly cohort reports per partner
Public: Annual impact report, published on this site, including what didn't work
Funders: Per grant requirements, with honest distinction between targets, validated outcomes, and planning hypotheses

Known unknowns¶

In keeping with the Epistemic Honesty directive, Second Boot publicly tracks what it does not yet know:

Whether the "earned, not given" framing produces better long-term outcomes than direct device giveaways in this population
Whether peer instructors produce better cohort engagement than outside instructors at the same skill level
Whether the Seniors track in-home setup visit improves device-use persistence vs. no visit
Whether the local AI (Ollama) integration in Module 04 has measurable curiosity or skill carryover beyond the session
Whether the workforce pipeline ratios (trainees → paid roles → external employment) are realistic at our scale
What the realistic donation yield curve looks like beyond initial pilot donors

These are not problems with the program — they are the things Second Boot will learn as cohorts run. They are documented here so they can't quietly turn into confident claims later.