# Startup Board Pack > Assemble board, investor-update, and exec reporting packs for an early-stage or growth-stage SaaS company - the narrative arc a board actually reads, cash and runway framing, the metric set by stage, cohort and bridge storytelling, and how to present a miss. Use when building a board deck, monthly investor update, exec review pack, or QBR. Trigger on "board pack", "board deck", "investor update", "board meeting", "exec review", "QBR", "monthly reporting package", "what do I show the board". - Skill: `lukehle/startup-board-pack` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add lukehle/startup-board-pack` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/lukehle/startup-board-pack/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Marketing & Growth - Author: Lukehle (https://skillmd.com/u/lukehle) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/lukehle/startup-board-pack --- # Startup board pack A board pack is a **decision document**, not a data dump. Its job is to get a small number of important decisions made and to keep the board from being surprised. The governing rule: > **No surprises.** A board that learns about a problem in the meeting learns two things: the > problem, and that you sit on problems. The second is more expensive. Bad news goes early, > quantified, with a plan. Load `saas-metrics` for definitions and `tie-out` for the proof obligation. Every number in a board pack must be tied out to closed figures before it leaves the building. --- ## The arc Board attention decays fast. Order by importance, not by chronology or by org chart. | # | Section | Length | Contains | |---|---|---|---| | 1 | **The ask** | 1 slide | What you need from the board *today*. Decisions, approvals, intros. Put it first, not last | | 2 | **Scoreboard** | 1 slide | 6-10 metrics, actual vs plan vs prior, with a plain-language verdict per line | | 3 | **Cash and runway** | 1 slide | Cash, net burn, runway in months, next raise timing. Never buried | | 4 | **Growth** | 2-3 slides | ARR bridge, pipeline, retention/cohorts, the one thing driving or blocking growth | | 5 | **What changed** | 1-2 slides | Material variances vs plan with drivers and forward implication (from `flux-analysis`) | | 6 | **Risks** | 1 slide | Top 3, each with an owner, a mitigation, and a trigger point | | 7 | **Functional updates** | as needed | Product, GTM, people — short | | 8 | **Appendix** | unbounded | Full statements, detailed metrics, definitions, backup | Sections 1-3 must survive on their own. Assume some readers get no further. --- ## The scoreboard One slide, 6-10 lines. Every line: **actual, plan, prior period, and a verdict.** ``` Actual Plan Prior vs Plan Verdict ARR $4.82M $5.10M $4.61M (5.5%) Behind - new logos light Net new ARR $210K $290K $255K (27.6%) Behind - see growth section NRR (TTM) 104% 108% 106% (4 pts) Watch - contraction in SMB Gross margin 76% 75% 75% +1 pt On track Net burn $412K $455K $388K +9.5% Better than plan Runway 14.2 mo 13.0 mo 15.1 mo +1.2 mo On track Cash $5.85M $5.92M $6.26M (1.2%) On track Headcount 47 50 45 (3) Behind on hiring - deliberate ``` The verdict column is the value. A board reading a table without verdicts has to derive your judgment, and different members will derive different ones. **Use exactly four verdicts:** `On track`, `Watch`, `Behind`, `At risk`. Define them once — for instance, `Watch` = within 10% of plan but trending wrong; `Behind` = missed plan, plan for recovery exists; `At risk` = missed plan, no credible recovery inside the period. Consistency across meetings is what makes them meaningful. --- ## Cash and runway For a startup this is the slide that matters most, and it is the one most often softened. State plainly: ``` Cash on hand (2026-07-31) $5,850,000 Net burn, trailing 3-month average $412,000/mo Runway at current burn 14.2 months Runway at plan burn (hiring resumes Q4) 11.8 months Zero-cash date at current burn 2026-10-02 Next raise: target open 2026-12, close 2026-Q2 (leaves ~6 months buffer) ``` Rules: - **Show runway on both current and planned burn.** Planned burn is usually higher; the gap is the real decision. - **Give a zero-cash date, not just a month count.** A date is concrete; "14 months" is abstract. - **Never present runway on a single month's burn.** Use a trailing 3-month average and say so. - **If runway is under 12 months, it goes in section 1 as an ask,** not in section 3 as information. --- ## Stage-appropriate framing The same number means different things at different stages. Always frame against your stage, and say which stage you are framing against. | Stage | Board mostly cares about | Metrics that are *not* yet meaningful | |---|---|---| | Pre-seed / seed | Evidence of product-market fit, qualitative learning, runway | LTV:CAC, magic number, cohort NRR — the n is too small | | Series A | Repeatable acquisition, early retention, burn multiple trend | Long-horizon LTV, mature cohort curves | | Series B | Efficiency at scale — CAC payback, NRR, Rule of 40, magic number | — most metrics now apply | | Series C+ | Rule of 40, FCF path, segment-level economics | — | **Do not report a metric your data cannot support.** LTV:CAC computed on 11 customers with 5 months of history is a made-up number wearing a suit. Say "not yet meaningful at n=11" instead. Boards respect that; they do not respect a number that falls apart under one question. --- ## Presenting a miss There is a shape to this and it works: 1. **The number, first and unhedged.** "We closed $210K net new ARR against a $290K plan. We missed by 28%." 2. **Why, decomposed.** "Two of the three enterprise deals we planned slipped: Acme ($55K, now signed 08-14) and Northwind ($40K, verbal commit, contracting). The third, Delta ($30K), we lost to a competitor on integration depth." 3. **Recurring or one-time.** "Two are timing; one is a real loss. Adjusted for the slips, we were ~$45K light, which is 15% not 28%." 4. **What changes.** "August already has $95K of the slipped ARR closed. We are holding the Q4 number. The Delta loss goes to the product roadmap discussion in section 7." 5. **The trigger.** "If September net new is under $240K, we cut the Q4 hiring plan by three roles. That decision point is 10-05." Never lead with the explanation. Lead with the number. Explaining before disclosing reads as managing the board, and boards notice. --- ## Charts that earn their slide Per `fin-artifact` for rendering conventions: - **ARR bridge (waterfall)** — the single best growth visual. New / expansion / contraction / churn. - **Cohort retention heatmap** — with cohort sizes shown, small cells suppressed. - **Cash and runway line** — actual to date, projected forward on both burn scenarios, zero-cash date marked. - **Actual vs plan with a variance band** — not two lines the reader has to subtract mentally. - **Rule of 40 scatter over time** — growth on one axis, margin on the other, your path traced. Charts that do not earn a slide: pie charts of revenue mix, dual-axis anything, 3D effects, month-by-month tables of every GL account, and any chart whose caption is a restatement of its title. --- ## Pre-send checklist - [ ] Every number ties out to closed figures (`tie-out` blocks exist and PASS) - [ ] Metric definitions are unchanged from last period, or the change is flagged and history restated - [ ] The ask slide contains actual asks, not a summary - [ ] Runway appears in the first three slides - [ ] Every miss has a driver, a classification, and a trigger point - [ ] No customer-identifying detail below the aggregation threshold (`finance-guardrails` Rail 5) - [ ] No employee compensation detail - [ ] Appendix contains the definitions page - [ ] **Sending is a human action.** Per Rail 1, this skill assembles and stages the pack. A human sends it --- ## Degraded mode Entirely a reasoning and structure skill. With no tooling it produces the pack outline, the scoreboard structure, the framing, and the drafted commentary — the numbers come from wherever you can get them, with unverified figures explicitly marked as such. --- ## Related skills - `saas-metrics` — definitions and benchmarks for the scoreboard - `flux-analysis` — section 5 commentary - `three-statement` — the appendix statements and their integrity checks - `fin-artifact` — building the pack as a live or snapshot artifact - `finance-guardrails` — Rails 1 and 5 govern sending and disclosure