Non-profits, Associations and Foundations

Small budgets, hard obligations, real consequences

AI for charities, associations and foundations, built on small models and cached retrieval so the running cost survives the grant.

  • Small models, open weights
  • Safeguarding by design
  • Reduced-rate work available

Economics

Architected for the running cost, not the demo

The design constraint is what one interaction costs twelve months after launch, when the pilot funding is gone. Small or open-weight models for most traffic, caching for the questions that recur, short retrieval instead of long prompts.

  • Cached retrieval for the questions that recur most
  • A larger model only where the task demands it
  • Cost per interaction modelled before anything is built

Services

The languages people actually speak

Membership and eligibility questions, bookings, deadlines and service directories across WhatsApp, web, SMS and the phone line: a two-person office with the reach of a call centre.

  • WhatsApp
  • SMS
  • voice
  • web

Cost

Open weights

Self-hosted small models remove per-token pricing once volume justifies it.

Reach

Voice and SMS still matter

Beneficiaries without smartphones, data or confident literacy are reached by phone and text. Primary channels here, not accessibility afterthoughts.

Safeguarding

The person in crisis nobody expected

Any public service eventually gets a disclosure it was not designed for. The system hands over to a trained human at once: it never assesses risk, reassures or closes the contact.

  • disclosure
  • handover
  • release gate

Data

Minimisation as the primary control

Consent is often not the lawful basis available, so minimisation does the work: the assistant sees required fields, never the case record, and volunteer access assumes turnover.

  • special category
  • retention
  • access review
  1. 01 Member services Membership, eligibility, bookings, status
  2. 02 Safeguarding escalation Disclosures reach a trained human at once
  3. 03 Cached retrieval Recurring questions dominate the volume
  4. 04 Small open-weight model A larger model only where the task needs it
  5. 05 Cost per interaction The substrate: what it costs at renewal
Every layer above is chosen by what it costs per interaction twelve months after launch.

Models

  • Small open-weight models
  • Llama
  • Quantised local inference
  • Hosted APIs where justified

Cost control

  • Response caching
  • Model routing
  • Short-context retrieval
  • Per-interaction cost model

Channels

  • WhatsApp
  • SMS
  • Voice / IVR
  • Website
  • Member portal

Systems

  • CRM and membership databases
  • Grant management
  • Donation platforms
  • Volunteer rota tools

Compliance

  • GDPR special category data
  • KVKK
  • Safeguarding policy
  • DPIA
  • Retention schedules

Three ways in. Stop after any of them.

2–3 weeks

Scope and cost review

Which demand is genuinely automatable, what it costs per interaction and per year, and where the answer is not to build.

Cost forecast, safeguarding and data protection constraints, board-readable recommendation

6–12 weeks

Service build

One service built end to end on the low-cost architecture, with safeguarding escalation tested adversarially.

Working service, multilingual evaluation sets, twelve-month running cost forecast

Ongoing

Supported operation

Operation at a rate set against your budget, with periodic safeguarding review and progressive handover to your staff.

Supported operation, safeguarding and content review, trustee and funder reporting

Questions

Cost is the primary design constraint, not an afterthought. Caching handles the repetitive traffic, a small or open-weight model handles most of the rest, and retrieval returns short context rather than long prompts. Self-hosting removes per-token pricing where volume justifies it, and you get a figure up front.

It hands over to a trained human immediately and does nothing else: no risk assessment, no reassurance, no closing the conversation. The path is designed with your safeguarding lead, written into the guardrails and tested adversarially before every release as a gate. Staff are told what it does not detect.

When the information is not written down. An assistant answers from your content, so if eligibility criteria live in three people's heads and an outdated PDF, the first output will be confidently wrong in public. Writing the answers down costs a fraction and often resolves most of the demand on its own.

Bring us the constraint, not the brief

Regulator, budget, deadline, legacy core, a board that has been burned once already. Tell us what you are working around.