Conditions, requirements & scoring

1. Minimum conditions and scoring rubric

​

Minimum eligibility requirements

​

• Foundation registered and subject to Law 50/2002 / 49/2002, with at least 2 years of seniority and demonstrable activity (annual reports, projects, accounts).

• Presentation of basic accounts and sufficient financial documentation to evaluate their situation (ultra-detail is not necessary, but a minimum of transparency is).

​

Proposed scoring rubric (100 points)

​

1. Potential social impact (0–30 points):

   • Clarity of mission, beneficiary group, social relevance.

   • Current and potential reach of projects.

2. Economic situation and need for support (0–25 points):

   • Foundations with a reduced budget and high dependency on grants or a single patron add more points.

   • Foundations with high liquidity, large reserves, or strong financial muscle add fewer points (because they could pay for the program without a subsidy).

3. Team maturity and commitment (0–25 points):

   • Stable minimum team (not entirely dispersed volunteering).

   • Explicit involvement in the project (clear managers, assigned time, commitment to attend sessions).

4. Focus and clarity of the digital project (0–15 points):

   • Defined and realistic objectives, aligned with the accelerator.

   • Coherence between ambition and implementation capacity.

5. Strategic fit with the accelerator (0–5 points):

   • ​​Micro/small foundation.

   • Potential to become a replicable success case.

​

Subsidy tiers

 

With this scoring rubric, you can define:

​

• ≥ 85 points:

  • Subsidy up to 100% of the program cost.

  • Typical profile: High impact, very limited resources, strong team commitment, and clear digital project.

• 70–84 points:

  • Subsidy between 70% and 90%.

  • Profile: Good impact, moderate resources, clear commitment, but perhaps less financial urgency or lower project maturity.

• 55–69 points:

  • Subsidy between 40% and 60%.

  • Profile: Acceptable impact, slightly higher resources, or doubts in focus/commitment.

• < 55 points:

  • Not subsidized or only very partial support (e.g., diagnosis + roadmap), or invitation to apply in future rounds.

​

2. Tax treatment: prioritizing the collaboration agreement

​

Yes, prioritizing the corporate collaboration agreement (convenio de colaboración empresarial) over a "pure donation" is clearly favorable for both parties in the Spanish context.

​​

• Why it is favorable for IF & BM (and the fund):

  • The cost of the program channeled via a collaboration agreement is a deductible expense in Corporate Income Tax (it is treated as an advertising/collaboration expense, not as a non-deductible donation).

  • Certain technical problems of service donations (pro bono) and VAT self-consumption are avoided, because the agreement is expressly regulated as a form of patronage with a consideration of dissemination/visibility.

• For the foundation:

  • What is received in kind within the framework of a collaboration agreement is exempt income in Corporate Income Tax and not subject to VAT, provided that the consideration is dissemination, presence of logo, mention in the annual report, etc., without return payments.

  • The agreement is a clear legal basis for registering the operation and justifying it before the Tax Agency (Hacienda) / Protectorate.

​

How it would be implemented in our model

​

Sign a Corporate Collaboration Agreement Ideafoster & The Black Moon Project – Foundation X with each foundation, which includes:

​

• Market value of the acceleration program.

• Subsidized percentage.

• Scope of work.

• Visibility commitments (logo, mentions, success case, etc.).