Brainforge × GlobalVetLink — Q2 2026 Extension Pitch
For: Kat Gillis and GVL leadership From: Brainforge Labs Date: April 2026 Context: Workstream 1 deliverables complete — tracking plan, Pendo audit, and tool recommendation in hand. This document proposes what to do next.
Pricing reference
GVL’s revenue model is usage-based: every signed certificate is a billable event, invoiced monthly. Published per-certificate fees (from globalvetlink.com/signup):
| Cert type | Advantage Plan ($39.95/mo) | Starter Plan ($0/mo) |
|---|---|---|
| CVI | $11.75 | $32.00 |
| EECVI | $48.00 | $65.00 |
| EIA, VFD | $12.75 | $32.50 |
| Rabies | $3.00 | $5.50 |
| Script | $1.25 | $4.00 |
| International — Level 1 | $43.00 | $57.00 |
| International — Level 2 | $138.00 | $179.00 |
| International — EU Transit | $43.00 | $57.00 |
| Hawaii | $138.00 | $179.00 |
| Enterprise | Contact for details | — |
Revenue impact framing below is directional, based on these published rates. Actual impact depends on platform volume and segment sizes, which we will baseline in delivery.
Module 1 — Product Analytics Foundation
Opportunity
- The Workstream 1 tracking plan is ready — but none of it is live in production yet.
- Pendo has 68 track events and 150+ stale features, producing conflicting counts. Leadership can’t trust what it shows today.
- Current state: no reliable signal on activation, funnel drop-off, or certificate completion.
What we can do
- Implement every event and property in the signed tracking plan, either by trimming and restructuring Pendo or migrating to a better-fit product analytics tool (Amplitude or equivalent — recommendation delivered as part of Workstream 1).
- QA instrumentation end-to-end: events fire correctly in staging and production; no duplicate counting.
- Build one governed baseline funnel report (certificate creation, start → sign) as the proof of accuracy that leadership signs off on.
The pitch
The tracking plan is the blueprint. This workstream is building the house. Until events are live and trusted, every other analytics initiative is running blind. We implement, validate, and hand you data you can act on.
Deliverables
| Deliverable | Description |
|---|---|
| Implemented tracking plan | All events and properties from the signed tracking plan live in the chosen analytics tool |
| Pendo trim or tool migration | Stale features retired; instrumentation matches SSOT — or clean implementation in replacement tool |
| Baseline funnel report | One CVI creation funnel (start → ownership → animal info → preview → sign), QA’d and signed off |
| Tool decision memo | Documented rationale and next steps for Pendo vs. alternative |
Acceptance criteria
- Accuracy: Events fire correctly in production; no duplicate counting for core funnel steps
- Definitions: Funnel steps match the signed tracking plan; cert type captured as event property, not as separate events
- Source of truth: Kat (or designated product owner) signs off on v1 funnel report accuracy before broader rollout
Module 2 — Funnel Optimization
Opportunity
- Pendo data (last 30 days) shows ~1.8% end-to-end CVI completion — from entering the creation flow to signing. Median time to complete: ~5.5 days.
- The biggest measured drop-off: ~54% exit between the NVAP modal and the CVI edit step. A further ~87% cumulative loss by the Animal Actions step.
- GVL’s revenue is directly tied to signed certificates. Every user who starts a certificate and doesn’t finish it is a billable event that never happens.
- A 1.8% → 5% completion rate improvement on a base of 1,000 monthly certificate starters would generate roughly +128/month per 1,000 starters in additional CVI revenue (at Advantage 32.00 respectively), with no new customer acquisition required. At higher volumes — or for higher-value cert types like EECVI (65), Hawaii (179), or International (179) — the impact compounds significantly.
What we can do
- Use the trusted funnel (from Module 1) to measure completion rate, time-to-sign, and drop-off points by cert type — replacing the current noisy Pendo view with a clean, agreed signal.
- Diagnose the biggest leaks: is drop-off driven by UX friction, missing license/payment prerequisites, multi-session abandonment, or Smart Engine confusion?
- Design and run 2–3 targeted experiments (e.g. progress indicators, draft-resume nudges, Smart Engine prompt optimization, onboarding simplification) with defined success criteria and sample rules.
- Deliver a certificate completion scorecard for leadership: completion rate, time-to-sign, and experiment results, updated continuously.
The pitch
The certificate funnel is your revenue engine. Right now it’s running at less than 2%. We diagnose exactly where users fall off, run experiments to fix it, and give you a scorecard that connects product decisions to signed certs and revenue.
Deliverables
| Deliverable | Description |
|---|---|
| Completion rate baseline | Certified funnel metrics: completion rate, time-to-sign, drop-off by stage and cert type |
| Drop-off diagnosis | Qualitative and quantitative root-cause analysis for the two largest leaks |
| Experiment backlog | 3–5 prioritized experiments with hypotheses, interventions, sample rules, and success metrics |
| Certificate completion scorecard | Weekly leadership view: completion rate trend, experiment status, revenue implication |
Acceptance criteria
- Accuracy: Funnel metrics reflect production data from implemented tracking plan; no Pendo noise
- Definitions: “Completed” = signed certificate; “Drop-off” = session ended without sign; both defined and agreed
- Source of truth: VP-level sign-off on scorecard format and metric definitions before experiments launch
- Completeness: Each experiment documented with hypothesis, method, and next-step regardless of outcome
Module 3 — Lifecycle Automation
Opportunity
-
GVL’s marketing and CS teams are manually pulling user lists from Pendo, exporting CSVs, and uploading to HubSpot to run outreach — repeatedly, for multiple segments.
-
Known manual plays today: dormant accounts (never logged in), vets missing license or signature, EECVI permit holders with no active permits, EIA users from last year with no activity this year.
-
This process doesn’t scale: as the user base grows, manual effort grows linearly. It also introduces latency — the window between a user stalling and receiving a nudge is days to weeks.
-
Each reactivated user who reaches a signed certificate adds immediate revenue at GVL’s published per-cert rates. The table below shows annual recovered revenue by cert type at 3 certs/month per clinic — a conservative estimate for an active clinic — across two volume scenarios. All figures use published pricing; actual mix will depend on which cert types dormant clinics were issuing.
Annual recovered revenue — 3 certs/clinic/month (Advantage / Starter pricing):
Cert type Advantage Starter 20 clinics/yr (Adv / Start) 100 clinics/yr (Adv / Start) CVI $11.75 $32.00 23,040 115,200 EECVI $48.00 $65.00 46,800 234,000 EIA / VFD $12.75 $32.50 23,400 117,000 Rabies $3.00 $5.50 3,960 19,800 International (L1) $43.00 $57.00 41,040 205,200 International (L2) $138.00 $179.00 128,880 644,400 Hawaii $138.00 $179.00 128,880 644,400 Formula: clinics × 3 certs/mo × 12 months × cert fee. No new acquisition cost — this is revenue from users already in the system.
What we can do
- Map each manual segment to an automated product-event trigger in the analytics tool, with HubSpot as the action layer.
- Build and launch 3–5 automated lifecycle flows, each with defined entry criteria, exit criteria, owner, and measurement.
- Create a shared segment definitions document: “activated,” “stalled,” “dormant,” “at-risk” — agreed by marketing, CS, and product — so campaigns and dashboards speak the same language.
- Deliver a lifecycle performance view: reactivation rate by segment, revenue from reactivated users, hours saved.
The pitch
Right now, knowing which vets need a nudge requires manual work. We automate the plays Kat’s team is already running — faster, more targeted, and measured — so every dormant vet or blocked license is touched at the right moment without anyone pulling a CSV.
Deliverables
| Deliverable | Description |
|---|---|
| Segment-to-trigger map | Each manual segment documented as an event-based entry rule in the analytics tool |
| 3–5 automated HubSpot flows | Live flows with entry/exit criteria, ownership, and measurement for: dormant accounts, missing license, lapsed EECVI, lapsed EIA |
| Segment definitions doc | ”Activated,” “stalled,” “dormant,” “at-risk” defined, versioned, agreed across teams |
| Lifecycle performance dashboard | Reactivation rate per flow, revenue from reactivated users, weekly trend |
Acceptance criteria
- Accuracy: Automated segments match the intent of current manual pulls; QA pass documented
- Definitions: Segment criteria documented and agreed by marketing and CS before flows launch
- Source of truth: At least one flow live in HubSpot, firing on product signals, before sign-off
- Completeness: Each flow has documented owner and an agreed review cadence
Module 4 — All-In-One: The Recommended Path
This is our primary recommendation. Modules 1–3 solve the same problem from three angles; they share infrastructure, share data, and compound in value when executed together. We propose delivering them as a single, sequenced program rather than three separate projects.
Opportunity
- GVL runs a product-led growth motion — free signup, self-serve certificate creation, usage-based billing — but without the measurement infrastructure to know where it’s working or breaking.
- The three modules above are mutually dependent: you can’t optimize the funnel without trusted events (Module 1); you can’t automate lifecycle plays without clean segment signals (Module 1 + 2); and none of it compounds without consistent definitions across analytics, HubSpot, and leadership dashboards.
- Doing them piecemeal means building the same data foundations three times and leaving gaps between teams. Doing them together means one integrated program with one consistent data layer.
- The full-funnel opportunity: if GVL brings its website → sign-up → activation → first signed cert conversion rates toward B2B SaaS medians (where vertical compliance SaaS typically runs 26–30% activation, per Drexus/FinTech vertical benchmarks), the directional impact on new paying clinics per month — at GVL’s published cert pricing — is meaningful and compounding. We’ll baseline and model this in Phase 1.
What we can do
| Phase | Scope | Timeline |
|---|---|---|
| Phase 1 — Instrument & Baseline | Implement tracking plan; Pendo trim or migration; baseline funnel and segment reports | Weeks 1–3 |
| Phase 2 — Optimize & Automate | Funnel experiments; automated HubSpot lifecycle flows; segment definitions locked | Weeks 4–8 |
| Phase 3 — Govern & Report | Completion scorecard; lifecycle performance dashboard; training and handoff | Weeks 9–10 |
The pitch
We’ve done the design work. We know your events, your funnel, and your lifecycle plays. The all-in-one program turns that into trusted data, a faster funnel, and automated outreach — in ten weeks, with one team, one set of definitions, and one executive scorecard that ties it all together.
Deliverables (combined from Modules 1–3)
Workstream 1: Analytics Foundation
- Implemented tracking plan in production (events + properties per SSOT)
- Pendo trim or tool migration completed
- Baseline funnel report, QA’d and signed off
Workstream 2: Funnel Optimization
- Completion rate baseline, drop-off diagnosis
- 3–5 experiments designed and launched
- Certificate completion scorecard
Workstream 3: Lifecycle Automation
- Segment-to-trigger map
- 3–5 automated HubSpot flows live
- Shared segment definitions document
- Lifecycle performance dashboard
Acceptance criteria
- Accuracy: All funnel metrics reflect production data; no Pendo noise; segment criteria validated
- Definitions: Data dictionary covering funnel steps, segment definitions, cert types — versioned and agreed by marketing, CS, and product
- Source of truth: VP-level sign-off on (1) v1 funnel report, (2) first live HubSpot flow, (3) completion scorecard format
- Completeness: Each experiment and each automated flow documented with owner and review cadence
If Kat wants to pick modules individually
All four modules are available independently. Recommended sequencing if picking separately:
- Module 1 first — it is the data foundation that everything else depends on.
- Module 2 or 3 next — both can run in parallel once Module 1 is complete; Module 2 is higher direct revenue leverage; Module 3 is faster to show operational ROI.
- Module 4 (All-In-One) — any time; the phased delivery structure is the same whether scoped together or added sequentially.
Summary
| Module | Core opportunity | Directional revenue framing |
|---|---|---|
| 1 — Analytics Foundation | Trusted events and funnel data don’t exist yet; every other initiative depends on this | Enabler — unlocks measurement for Modules 2 and 3 |
| 2 — Funnel Optimization | CVI completion is ~1.8%; moving toward 5–10% adds signed certs from existing users at 48.00 each, with no new acquisition cost | Material cert revenue recovered at scale; exact figures baselined in Phase 1 |
| 3 — Lifecycle Automation | Manual outreach to dormant and blocked users delays revenue by days-to-weeks; automation accelerates and scales it | Reactivation revenue from 4 existing segments; staff time reclaimed from CSV operations |
| 4 — All-In-One | Modules 1–3 are interdependent; executing together is faster, cheaper, and produces a unified data layer | Cumulative upside across funnel efficiency, reactivation, and new user conversion — modeled with actuals in Phase 1 |