Room B Kit · Corporate Partners Marketing Package

01The Bank Paradox — case-for-support

One page. Lift verbatim into a partnership pitch, LinkedIn InMail, or the opening two minutes of any Room B conversation. This is not confrontational — it is structural, and the target audience already knows it is true.

"The sector that issued the debt is the same sector whose corporate-responsibility spend can fund the resolution. That is not a critique. It is a partnership."

Room B value proposition · room-b.html

What we mean by the Bank Paradox

Australian banks, credit-card issuers, personal-loan providers, buy-now-pay-later platforms and life insurers are the source of the consumer debt that follows a terminal diagnosis into the home. That is a fact about the credit economy, not an accusation. Every one of those institutions also runs a community investment programme, an ESG reporting cycle, and — in most cases — a customer-hardship team that is already engaging with these households after diagnosis. The paradox is not that the sector caused the harm; it is that the sector is already trying to help, but from the creditor side of the phone call. Life Without Debt exists on the other side of that phone call. A corporate partnership is what makes both sides of the conversation coherent.

What a partner gets — three things, in this order

An ESG-reportable partnership with a registered charity (ACNC · PBI · DGR Item 1) whose theory of change is causally clean and whose outcomes are independently measurable. Your sustainability report gets a page with numbers you can defend.
A brand-safe association with the most under-served point in the Australian palliative-care pathway — the household in the diagnostic month whose creditors are still ringing. This is not a category anyone else in the sector owns.
An employee-giving programme with proof of concept. Not a generic workplace-giving portal — a specific service, with specific outcomes, that your staff can be told about at all-hands and choose to contribute to. Payroll integration takes ~30 days.

What a partner does not get

Naming rights over case selection. A funded case is a case that meets our intake criteria — not a case that reflects the partner's target customer segment.
Access to household-level data. Beneficiary confidentiality is absolute. Partners receive aggregate outcome data, not individual case files.
A promise of positive PR on demand. If a case goes badly, we tell the partner before it becomes public — we do not manage the partner's brand for them.
Preferential referral treatment for their own customers. A partner's customers who have a terminal diagnosis are referred through the same pathway as anyone else. We do not run a shortcut for financial-services customers.

The 87c ratio in corporate context

Of every corporate-partnership dollar, 87 cents reaches direct household advocacy. The remaining 13 cents funds infrastructure absorbed by Credit Mediation Services Pty Ltd via a Board-approved cost-recovery agreement (disclosed in the Register of Interests). Corporate CFOs will ask the ratio question. This is the answer.

Source: room-b.html Bank Paradox narrative; value-proposition.html Room B canvas; media-campaign.html §Corporate Partnerships.

02Three-tier partnership ladder

Three tiers inherited directly from the live /room-b page. The mid tier is the recommended default because the co-branding rights and named-partner status make ESG reporting materially easier — and most target partners can absorb $20K without a specific board resolution.

Supporting Partner

$5,000

Annual · Renewable

Entry-tier partnership for firms testing the fit before committing more. Funds approximately six household advocacy engagements. Suited to law firms, financial planning practices, and credit unions.

Logo on website and annual impact report
Three social-media acknowledgements per year
Certificate of partnership
Quarterly aggregate outcome report
Employer-matched staff giving up to $2,500

Principal Partner

$20,000

Annual · Renewable

The recommended default. Funds approximately 22 household advocacy engagements. Co-branded employee-giving campaign. Sustainability-report page with named-partner outcome data. Suited to regional banks, insurance mid-tier, wealth-management firms.

All Supporting benefits
Named in every media release for the year
Annual all-hands presentation to partner staff (Laurence + Lisa)
Co-branded employee-giving campaign
CEO acknowledgement letter (from Chair)
Priority referral pathway agreement (customer hardship team → LWD intake)

Foundation Partner

$50,000

Annual · Multi-year

Named-programme tier. Funds approximately 55 household advocacy engagements. First-look on published outcome data for ESG cycles. Jointly-authored industry white paper. Suited to major banks, life insurers, and any firm that wants their CSR spend to be materially unique.

All Principal benefits
Founding Corporate Partner status — permanent
Board-observer invitation (annual meeting)
Named programme: "The [Company] Hardship-Resolution Fund"
First-look rights on published outcome data for ESG report
Jointly-authored industry white paper (year 2 output)

Target partner map (Year 1)

Sector segment	Fit rationale	Recommended tier	Approach route
Regional / community bank	Customer-hardship team already engages these households; CRA-equivalent community obligation	Principal $20K	CEO / CSR Manager direct
Life insurance firm	Terminal-illness benefit administration is core business; direct customer overlap	Foundation $50K	LinkedIn InMail to Head of Sustainability + capability doc
Credit union	Member-owned governance model; community-impact-as-brand thesis	Supporting $5K	Board-level introduction via COBA network
Wills / estate law firm	Client overlap: terminal diagnosis clients need wills + debt advocacy simultaneously	Principal $20K	Professional referral MOU as first step, partnership follows
Financial planning firm	Referrals of clients post-diagnosis to specialised debt advocacy; complementary service	Supporting $5K	FPA network warm intro
Major bank	Long sales cycle; requires ESG-team engagement 6–12 months before signature	Foundation $50K	Two-track: ESG team + community-investment team

Source: media-campaign.html §Target Corporate Partners; room-b.html live tier structure.

03Talking points for the CSR / ESG conversation

Corporate partnership conversations are usually held with a CSR Manager, Head of Sustainability, or ESG Lead — not the CFO. Their success metric is the sustainability report their board reads once a year. Speak to that audience.

The two-sentence pitch

"Australia's palliative-care system helps people die well. Nobody helps them stop taking creditor phone calls while they do it. We do that. Your ESG budget could fund it, and your sustainability report gets outcome data you can defend line by line."

On why banks / insurers / lenders should fund this

"Your customer-hardship team is already working with these households — but they're working from the creditor side of the phone call. We're on the other side. A partnership doesn't put your brand on the debt; it puts your brand on the resolution. That's the difference between a compliance obligation and a community investment."

On what makes the outcome data ESG-reportable

"Four measurable outputs per case, K10 psychological distress score, independent evaluation partner, published methodology. Your sustainability report gets a page with numbers you can defend under external assurance. That's not common in charity partnerships and it's why we structure this way."

On the employer-matched giving mechanic

"Your staff give through payroll; you match to a cap; we tax-receipt the full amount because we're DGR Item 1. Setup is roughly 30 days through Good2Give or Benevity — you probably already have the plumbing. What we bring is a specific service your staff can be told about, not a generic 'charity of the month' portal that nobody engages with."

On the sensitive brand-risk question

"Your risk team will ask how we protect your brand if a case goes badly. Answer: household confidentiality is absolute — no case is named without seven-step consent — and if a case goes badly for a household, we tell you before it goes public. We don't manage your brand for you; we don't put you in a position where you're managing our failures either."

On the "won't you compete with our hardship team" question

"No. Your team handles the accounts you own. We handle everything else in the household's debt picture — the ATO, the credit card at the other institution, the buy-now-pay-later, the utility arrears. We usually make your team's conversation easier, not harder, because the household is no longer trying to solve six debts at once."

Phrase discipline for corporate conversations

Say

"debt-hardship negotiation" · "licensed advocacy" · "creditor engagement under statutory hardship"
"the households we work with"
"co-branded partnership" · "ESG-reportable outcomes"
"aggregate outcome data" · "named-partner impact report"
"employer-matched giving" · "workplace-giving programme"
"we work with creditors"

Don't say

"debt relief" · "debt forgiveness" · "debt cancellation"
"our clients" · "consumers"
"we fight the banks" · "we take on lenders"
"the tragic families we serve" · "victims of debt"
"your customers who are dying" (be specific: "households in your customer-hardship pipeline with a specialist-certified terminal diagnosis")

Source: Position Brief §09 voice + house rules.

04FAQ and objection handling

Eight questions corporate partners ask most often. Answers written to be adapted for the ESG / CSR audience.

Isn't this just workplace giving with extra steps?

No. Workplace giving is the payroll mechanic — one component of a Principal or Foundation partnership. The other components are the named-partnership rights, the aggregate outcome data your sustainability report can quote line by line, the annual all-hands presentation from Laurence and Lisa, and the priority referral pathway that connects your customer-hardship team directly to LWD intake. Workplace giving alone is a $2,500 line item. A structured partnership is a materially different corporate-community relationship.

Our customer hardship team already does this. Aren't we duplicating capacity?

Your team handles the accounts you own — that's the mandate. What your team cannot do is resolve the four other debts the household is also carrying (the credit card at the competitor, the ATO obligation, the buy-now-pay-later, the utility arrears, the small-business guarantee). Every one of those requires engagement with a different institution and — increasingly — a licensed advocate. That's where we come in. In practice, LWD makes your team's conversation with the household easier, because the household is no longer trying to solve six debts at once from the terminal-illness ward.

How is this different from a debt-management company?

The charity does not hold a credit licence and does not conduct credit assistance. Life Without Debt Ltd funds a separate for-profit licensed entity, Credit Mediation Services Pty Ltd, which holds ACL 387398 and conducts the advocacy under standard NCCP rules. The two-entity split is required by Australian law — a charity cannot hold a consumer credit licence. Related-party disclosure is public. The household pays nothing at any point. The debt-management model this most resembles is the not-for-profit financial-counselling sector, but with a licensed-advocacy layer added specifically to engage creditors formally.

What is the reputational risk if a case goes badly?

Managed at three levels. First, structural: we only take cases with a specialist-certified terminal diagnosis and documented consumer-debt exposure, which limits the "wrong case" risk substantially. Second, procedural: household confidentiality is absolute and no case is publicly named without our seven-step consent process. Third, relational: if a case does go badly — a household withdraws, an outcome is worse than expected, a media outlet notices something — we tell the partner within five business days, before it becomes public. Our reputational risk exposure is entirely knowable and pre-agreed; yours is not, unless you know ours.

Can we brand the programme with our name?

Yes at the Foundation Partner tier — you can name a fund ("The [Company] Hardship-Resolution Fund"), and every case funded from that pool is reported under that naming to your ESG team. What you cannot do is direct which cases the fund pays for beyond our intake criteria (we don't run a fund that funds only your customer demographic — that would compromise the referral pathway). And you cannot present the naming as a claim that your company created the model. The naming is a stewardship signal, not an ownership claim.

How do you protect the household's data?

Case files are held by LWD, encrypted, with access limited to the case officer and Lisa in her operational role. Household consent to have their case referenced in any public output requires the seven-step consent process. Aggregate outcome data supplied to partners is stripped of any identifying feature — postcode, diagnosis specifics, family composition — that would allow re-identification. We publish the data-handling framework and it is externally reviewable. This is Board discipline, not marketing preference.

What happens to the partnership if there's a change of leadership at either end?

Partnership agreements are annual, so a leadership change at either end triggers a re-engagement conversation at the next renewal window. In practice, most partnerships survive a change of CSR Manager because the sustainability team's institutional memory retains the outcome data. On our side, LWD's succession planning is at the constitution level — the licensed-advocacy function can transfer to another responsible manager under ASIC rules, and the Board's charter includes a partnership-continuity clause. Leadership changes at either end are not the risk; benign neglect is, which is what the stewardship playbook exists to prevent.

What would make you a bad corporate partner?

A partner that wanted its brand more visible than the household outcome. A partner that wanted case-level access to a demographic segment (e.g. "our credit-card customers only"). A partner that wanted a promise of positive PR on demand. A partner that wanted the naming rights over how we describe the sector as a whole. We can decline any of these cleanly at the pitch stage — better to lose the pitch than accept a partnership that compromises the referral pathway or the beneficiary relationship. What makes a good corporate partner is understanding that the sustainability-report value comes from the outcome data being defensible, not from the brand exposure being maximal.

Source: composites of corporate-partnership objections mapped against /room-b live page + register-of-interests + beneficiary-depiction-guardrails.

05ESG data pack — what a partner gets to publish

Sustainability reports need numbers that can be defended under external assurance. The following data package is what a Principal or Foundation partner receives quarterly, in a format ready to lift into the ESG report with attribution.

Metric	Definition	Reporting cadence	Assurance status
Households supported (partner-funded pool)	Closed cases funded from the named partner pool during the quarter	Quarterly	Case-file audit trail available
Total debt extinguished ($)	Debt reduced, waived or restructured under formal hardship arrangement	Quarterly	Creditor confirmations retained
Inter-generational liability prevented ($)	Debt that would have transferred to surviving family, extinguished before death	Quarterly	Case-officer certified
K10 psychological distress reduction (percentage points)	Household-reported movement on validated K10 instrument, intake to closure	Quarterly (aggregated)	Instrument published, methodology public
Average case cycle time (days)	From referral acceptance to case closure	Quarterly	System-timestamped
Average cost per case funded ($)	LWD direct advocacy expenditure per closed case	Quarterly	Annual audited
Direct-service ratio (%)	LWD expenditure reaching direct client service, per audited accounts	Annual	External auditor verified
Referral-source distribution	% of cases from palliative-care nurses / hospital social workers / MND Australia / direct enquiry	Quarterly	CRM-tracked

Sample ESG report paragraph (drop-in)

Suggested report language

"[Company] partnered with Life Without Debt Ltd (ACNC-registered public benevolent institution, DGR Item 1) as a [Principal / Foundation] Partner in [year]. During [reporting period], the partnership funded X household advocacy engagements. Total consumer debt extinguished under formal hardship arrangements: $[amount]. Total inter-generational liability prevented from transferring to surviving family members: $[amount]. Average household psychological distress reduction (K10 instrument): [X] percentage points. Average case resolution cycle: [X] days. Direct-service ratio (audited): [X]%. Partnership methodology and full outcome dataset available on request."

Source: theory-of-change.html §Measurement Framework; room-b.html Trust+Data payload structure; K10 psychological distress instrument (validated by AIHW).

06Employer-matched giving toolkit

DGR Item 1 endorsement means employees can give through pre-tax payroll deduction, and employers can match those gifts with the full amount tax-deductible on both sides. Setup takes ~30 days through the standard workplace-giving platforms most partners already use.

Setup mechanics

Step	Owner	Duration
1 · Confirm DGR Item 1 status with partner payroll / finance	LWD (send ACNC + DGR endorsement letter)	3 days
2 · Onboard to workplace-giving platform (Good2Give / Benevity / GiveNow)	Partner HR + LWD ops	7–14 days
3 · Launch email to staff (co-branded, from partner CEO + LWD)	Partner comms + LWD	3 days
4 · Optional: 20-min all-hands presentation from Laurence + Lisa	Partner learning & dev	30 mins live
5 · First payroll cycle enrolments processed	Partner payroll	Next pay cycle
6 · Employer match applied to enrolled amount, up to agreed cap	Partner finance	Monthly
7 · Consolidated tax-receipting from LWD (annual)	LWD	End of financial year

Communications assets for launch

Launch email (partner CEO to all staff)

Subject: "A new workplace-giving option we want to tell you about." Body: two paragraphs on the partnership, one paragraph on the household outcomes it funds, one link to the enrolment page. Under 250 words. Signed by partner CEO. Co-signed by Lisa Hugo.

Intranet / SharePoint page

Standing page with three tabs: "What is Life Without Debt", "How the matched giving works", "The households you're supporting" (aggregate outcome data, updated quarterly). Refreshed every quarter with new outcome numbers.

All-hands presentation (20 minutes)

Laurence + Lisa deliver in person or via Zoom. Fifteen slides. One composite case, the four measurable outputs, the six-stage journey, the ask (staff enrolment). Q&A open. Not a fundraising pitch — a briefing, adult tone, no saccharine.

Quarterly staff update

One-page PDF or intranet post, "Your matched giving this quarter." Aggregate: number of households, total debt extinguished, average cycle time. One line of thanks. No pity photography.

The one commitment we make on matched giving

Every enrolled employee receives an annual consolidated tax receipt for their giving, delivered before 15 July of the following financial year. No employee has to ask. No employee has to email us for a receipt. That's a small commitment; failing on it undoes months of relationship investment.

Source: media-campaign.html §Corporate Partnerships §Employee Giving; workplace-giving platform mechanics per Good2Give / Benevity documentation.

07Sales-cycle email sequence (six touches, four months)

Corporate partnership sales cycles run 4–8 months. This sequence carries the relationship from LinkedIn InMail through capability-doc download through meeting through partnership agreement. Cadence: one every 3 weeks, personal from Lisa or Board Chair. Suspend if a live conversation is running.

Touch 1
Day 0

Following your download of the partnership capability document

Thank-you note. Confirm what they downloaded. Offer 20-minute discovery Zoom. Attach one composite case study. No ask.

CTA: book-20-min-discovery

Touch 2
Week 3

The three-tier partnership structure, and which tier suits your sector

Link to the three-tier ladder. Explicit about which tier your peers in the sector have taken (once we have a first partner in the segment). If no peer yet, positioning as founding-cohort opportunity.

CTA: request-tier-comparison-doc

Touch 3
Week 6

What partnership outcome data looks like in practice

The ESG data pack (§05). Explicit: this is the data your sustainability team would receive, quarterly, in this format. Offer a call with our evaluation partner if their assurance team wants to review methodology.

CTA: schedule-methodology-briefing

Touch 4
Week 9

How the matched-giving mechanic works with your payroll

The matched-giving toolkit (§06) summarised. Setup mechanics. Offer to run through it with their HR team. Small, tactical, low-commitment touch.

CTA: intro-to-hr-lead

Touch 5
Week 12

Meeting invitation — Board Chair + Lisa + your ESG team

The formal meeting request. 45 minutes. Board Chair joins to signal governance seriousness. Explicit: this is the meeting where we discuss which tier and what term. Bring their CFO if partnership requires it.

CTA: propose-three-meeting-times

Touch 6
Week 16

Draft partnership agreement, for your legal team's review

The signed-ready partnership agreement. Explicit tier, term, deliverables, reporting commitments, exit clause, brand-use rights. Sent to their legal counsel with a two-week turnaround expectation.

CTA: return-signed-or-request-amendments

Suspend rule

Same rule as Room A. If the partner replies to any touch with a substantive question, pause the sequence. Reply to the question. Wait for their next signal. Resume the cadence from where they interrupted it. Sequences that fire over live conversations make you look automated and the partnership transactional.

Source: adapted from media-campaign.html §LinkedIn Partnership Exploration cadence; room-b.html three-tier ladder.

08Meeting deck — 10-slide skeleton

For the Touch-5 partnership meeting. Ten slides, 20 minutes talking, 25 minutes Q&A. The deck is a spine — the conversation is the deliverable.

Cover · Registered charity · PBI · DGR Item 1

Title: "A partnership proposal for [Partner Name]." Subtitle: "The Bank Paradox — turning sector obligation into structural help." Badges. Presenter names. Date.

Why we're here

The Bank Paradox in one paragraph. Not accusatory — structural. Your sector already engages these households; a partnership makes both sides of the conversation coherent.

The households we work with

28,000 to 42,000 Australians annually. Specialist-certified terminal diagnosis + documented consumer debt exposure. Referrer-mediated intake (palliative-care nurses, hospital social workers, MND Australia).

What we do — the six-stage case journey

Intake → collection → engagement → negotiation → resolution → referral back. LWD funds; licensed advocate acts. One case officer per household.

The two-entity structure

LWD (charity) funds CMS (licensed) on cost-recovery. Related-party disclosure public. This slide pre-empts the "is this a debt-management company" question the risk team will ask later.

The ESG data package — what your sustainability report gets

Four measurable outputs per case. K10 instrument. Quarterly cadence. Independently verifiable. Sample paragraph they can drop into their report.

The three tiers, and which fits your sector

Supporting $5K · Principal $20K · Foundation $50K. Explicit recommendation of tier based on their sector and existing CSR spend. Explicit what each tier funds in household terms.

The matched-giving mechanic (optional)

How it works. Setup timeline. Communications assets we provide. A concrete "your 400 staff × $10/fortnight = $104K/year at 1:1 match" worked example if their staff count supports it.

What we ask you to commit to

Annual agreement, specific tier, quarterly outcome review, one all-hands presentation per year. Explicit about what a "yes" makes possible. Explicit about what happens after signature.

What happens next

Draft agreement in two weeks · legal review by their counsel · signature within 60 days · onboarding runs in the following 30 days · first outcome report at quarter-end. Contact details for both Lisa and Board Chair.

Source: deck spine adapted from room-b.html live page structure + media-campaign.html §Corporate Partnerships §Capability Statement §Corporate Partner Version.

09Stewardship playbook

Corporate partnerships die from benign neglect, not from bad outcomes. The following cadence is a floor.

Cadence	Deliverable	Owner
Day 7 post-signature	Board Chair thank-you letter (paper, hand-signed)	Board Chair
Day 14	Onboarding call with partner CSR / ESG team — walk through what quarterly reporting looks like, agree the communications launch date	Lisa
Day 30	Public partnership announcement (co-approved LinkedIn + partner intranet post)	Partner comms + LWD
Day 45	Matched-giving launch (if applicable) — CEO all-staff email, intranet page live	Partner HR + LWD
Quarterly	Aggregate outcome data + short narrative paragraph, delivered before the partner's sustainability-reporting cycle	Lisa
Six months	Mid-term check-in call — Chair + partner CSR lead + evaluation partner. Format: 30 mins, no slides, honest.	Chair
Nine months	All-hands presentation to partner staff (Laurence + Lisa live)	LWD + partner L&D
Year-end	Annual impact report + named-partnership one-pager tailored for the partner's ESG report + renewal conversation invitation	Lisa
Any moment	If a material issue arises, notify the partner within five business days — before it becomes public	Chair or Lisa

The stewardship KPI that matters most

Renewal rate. First-year renewals are the leading indicator of a partnership that was worth signing. Target: 80% Y1→Y2 renewal at same tier or above. FIA benchmark for personally-stewarded corporate partnerships: 78%. If we drop below 70% renewal, the failure mode is stewardship, not fit.

Source: media-campaign.html §Corporate Partnerships stewardship framework; FIA Code of Practice §Donor Retention.

10Threading

Where this kit sits in the system

Live room page
/room-b — Bank Paradox narrative + three-tier structure Position Brief §05
Room B anchor · Trust+Data payload · Y1–Y5 targets Value Proposition
Room B canvas · jobs / pains / gains / proof Theory of Change
Root cause · causal chain · four outputs measurement Case studies
Margaret · David · Kwame — labelled composites Media campaign
§Corporate Partnerships + §LinkedIn cadence Register of Interests
LWD ↔ CMS related-party disclosure (partner risk-team reference) All marketing kits
Return to the kit index