Angel investors
How should an angel reassess a follow-on opportunity in a healthcare software startup?
a healthcare software startup: Reassess a follow-on using the evidence and terms available now.
Reassess a follow-on using the evidence and terms available now. The original investment decision is context, not a reason to ignore changes. Compare the company's progress, cash needs, price, rights, and alternatives with the assumptions behind the first check.
Start with the decision
Write a changed-evidence memo before deciding. Separate new facts from a desire to defend the earlier investment. Identify what participation would change in exposure and what information remains unavailable.
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 piloting an administrative scheduling product with a provider group. Staff use it in a narrow workflow, while procurement and data review determine whether a broader rollout is possible.
A clinic's enthusiasm does not resolve data handling, workflow ownership, or applicable regulatory questions. This example does not assume a particular legal classification or approval.
A simplified priced-round and cash comparison
Assume a fictional priced equity round of $3,500,000.00 at a pre-money value of $14,000,000.00. A $35,000.00 check divided by the simplified post-money amount produces 0.200% ownership. If a later issuance reduces existing holders by an assumed 20%, that interest becomes 0.160% without participation.
The exercise omits option pools, convertibles, preferences, fees, side agreements, and other actual terms. It is not a SAFE conversion model or a recommendation to invest or preserve ownership. Actual cap-table and document analysis belongs with qualified advisers. A percentage of ownership does not specify eventual proceeds or protect against total loss.
The fictional company's $900,000.00 of cash divided by $110,000.00 of monthly use gives 8.2 months under a constant-use assumption. Compare the administrative workflow and rollout dependencies with the current process. Do not treat an operational pilot as clinical efficacy evidence. Connect that simple quotient to dated obligations and milestones before drawing a conclusion about financing needs or progress.
| Item | Illustration |
|---|---|
| Assumed pre-money value / round size | $14,000,000.00 / $3,500,000.00 |
| Fictional investor check | $35,000.00 |
| Simplified initial ownership | 0.200% |
| Assumed later dilution | 20% |
| Ownership without later participation | 0.160% |
| Cash / constant monthly use | $900,000.00 / $110,000.00 |
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.
- What changed since the first check?
- Which milestone was reached?
- What terms are offered?
- What assumption failed?
- What alternatives exist?
Questions specific to this scenario
- Which workflow is actually in scope?
- Who approves data access?
- What specialist review is needed?
Review authorized workflow observations, procurement requirements, permissioned usage evidence, and specialist advice about applicable obligations. Avoid using identifiable patient information in a diligence packet.
A concrete next test
Ask the authorized workflow owner to map a narrow administrative use case without disclosing patient information. Identify the data-access and procurement approvals needed for the next step. Keep operational adoption evidence separate from claims about clinical benefit or regulatory status.
Interpret the result
A useful memo can support participation, a pass, or more inquiry. It should make the reasoning visible without implying that following prior winners or supporting struggling holdings is universally correct.
Compare the administrative workflow and rollout dependencies with the current process. Do not treat an operational pilot as clinical efficacy evidence.
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.