How can an angel write a decision memo about a deep tech startup?

Write a decision memo that separates the company story from the investor's reasoning. State the question, evidence, competing interpretations, terms needing review, and unresolved risks. A memo should remain understandable after enthusiasm for the meeting fades.

Start with the decision

Use a claim-evidence-judgment structure and include a reason the investment could fail. Record what would change the conclusion. Keep any personal suitability or allocation decision separate from a generic educational example.

The illustrative scenario

This is an educational workbook. The company or fund and all numerical inputs below are fictional. They are not ADIN results, customer claims, market benchmarks, or a forecast.

The fictional team is developing a sensing component with a laboratory prototype. Commercial customers require validation outside the lab before a design win. Manufacturing and qualification milestones compete for the same runway.

A successful laboratory test does not establish production reliability or buyer adoption. Keep technical feasibility, manufacturability, customer qualification, and commercial commitment separate.

Turn the scenario into an evidence decision

Consider a review of a deep tech startup in which a confident explanation arrives before the supporting records. Start with the first question in the table. Write down what an answer would change: the next interview, the experiment's scope, a request for specialist review, or a decision to wait. A question without a consequence can produce a longer document while adding little understanding.

Next, inspect the record named in the table and record its date, owner, permission boundary, and limitations. Request dated test protocols, repeatability results, independent technical references, and a milestone budget. Distinguish a customer's evaluation agreement from an order. If the record contradicts the explanation, preserve both accounts and ask which definition, period, or workflow differs. Do not silently select the version that makes the opportunity look strongest.

Finish with a conditional statement: if the specified evidence supports the claim under these conditions, take the named next step; otherwise investigate the unresolved question. A good memo can make an eventual mistake more informative by preserving the original assumptions. It cannot turn an uncertain early-stage investment into a predictable outcome or transfer responsibility to a template. This worked exercise is about the decision process. It does not assert that a fictional company has met a real diligence standard or that a template can authorize an investment.

Use this worksheet

Answer the questions with a source, date, owner, and next action. Mark an unknown as unknown. Use public or permissioned information and involve a qualified specialist when a question requires expertise beyond the team’s competence.

1. What decision is being considered?
2. Which evidence is strongest?
3. What is the contrary case?
4. Which terms need review?
5. What would change the conclusion?

Questions specific to this scenario

• What test can be reproduced?
• Which milestone depends on a third party?
• What changes between prototype and production?

Request dated test protocols, repeatability results, independent technical references, and a milestone budget. Distinguish a customer's evaluation agreement from an order.

A concrete next test

Ask a qualified technical reviewer to identify a repeatable test that distinguishes laboratory feasibility from the next commercial milestone. Record the equipment, conditions, dependencies, and evidence needed. A dramatic demonstration should not substitute for the specified validation process.

Interpret the result

A good memo can make an eventual mistake more informative by preserving the original assumptions. It cannot turn an uncertain early-stage investment into a predictable outcome or transfer responsibility to a template.

Compare the next financing milestone with the resources and dependencies needed to reach it. Use qualified technical reviewers for claims outside the investor's expertise.

Sources and method

These primary resources provide background for the concepts. The fictional scenario, calculations, and worksheet are ADIN educational examples; the sources do not report or validate those invented results. Reviewed October 11, 2026.

• Angel Capital Association: Knowledge Center
• Investor.gov: Private Equity Funds