Active Future

Assess: 13/20. Active Future has identifiable operators, a clear community proposition and independently described delivery. Current net profitability and operation without daily founder involvement remain partly verified.

• A1, proven and profitable core model: Partially, 2.5/5. Named franchisees, local activity listings and a School Games delivery account substantiate operation beyond a recruitment concept. Public earnings information remains mainly brand-reported averages, forecasts and selected examples. Current representative core-business accounts demonstrating net profit were not inspected.

• A2, operation without daily founder involvement: Partially, 2.5/5. The management page names franchise and operations roles, while local owners demonstrate delegated delivery. This is evidence of organisational capacity. Successful operation for 30 days without daily founder input was not publicly demonstrated, and the published consultation route still directs applicants to the founder.

• A3, understands ideal franchisee: Yes, 3/3. The homepage prioritises community commitment, willingness to learn, determination and building a business. Coaching, teaching and sports experience are not prerequisites. These are clear selection themes, although private assessment of capability and suitability was not audited.

• A4, realistic owner economics: Partially, 2/4. The homepage advertises expected first-year profit above £40,000, while the opportunity page describes turnover and gross margins. The distinction is unresolved without a current profit bridge covering delivery staff, venues, royalties and overheads. Paid services and funding are credible revenue routes but do not establish retained owner earnings.

• A5, meaningful differentiation: Yes, 3/3. Inclusive movement, schools, community activities and funded provision form a specific proposition. The independent 2023 School Games account describes engaging less-active pupils through a non-traditional activity. That supports the intended customer purpose without establishing exclusive delivery rights or guaranteed commercial success.

Reconcile the published earnings language and verify current representative owner economics. Test founder cover and assess whether each local service mix can cover delivery costs and owner time.

Build: 18.5/20. The public package documents manuals, preparation and practical support, with shared service policies providing additional context. Complete central access to all business resources remains partly verified.

• B1, documented operational playbook: Yes, 5/5. The franchise package explicitly offers an operations manual, process guides and supporting videos. This is direct evidence of written operational provision. The complete current manual, revision controls and owner compliance were not inspected.

• B2, structured onboarding: Yes, 4/4. Published preparation includes a small-group training event, follow-up sessions with department heads and video learning. The opportunity page says onboarding begins after a deposit. The full individual timetable and checks of competence remain private.

• B3, documented brand experience: Yes, 4/4. Operating guides and branded equipment support common delivery. The consumer site publishes Northumberland wraparound-care policies and describes licensed, trained dodgeball delivery. These establish documented standards without independently confirming their application by every operator or validating every policy.

• B4, central access to resources: Partially, 1.5/3. Marketing materials, guides, videos and specialist help are expressly available. One complete current portal bringing together every required business tool and resource was not publicly verified. Distributed provision can be useful and does not prove a central platform is absent.

• B5, launch without constant founder questions: Yes, 4/4. The management page identifies Dan Horsley as Franchise Director, Kirsty Lincoln as Operations Director and Callum Francis as Franchise Manager, plus specialist and product support. This gives concrete help beyond the founder personally answering every launch question. The public offer also includes practical opening assistance.

Maintain the documented preparation and specialist cover. Confirm where owners find current resources and which role takes responsibility for launch issues and continuing service standards.

Launch: 16/20. Active Future explains its proposition and audience and offers several routes to a conversation. The prospectus and contact route have identifiable access problems, while the complete selection sequence remains only partly public.

• L1, clear franchise proposition: Yes, 5/5. The opportunity describes a territory business delivering subscriptions, events and funded projects with central support. The current homepage states an initial £15,000 plus VAT investment. Applicants can understand the core role, although that headline is not a verified complete cash requirement and full financial terms need reconciliation.

• L2, suitable applicant messaging: Yes, 4/4. Community purpose, business ambition, learning and responsibility are central to the recruitment content. The message addresses a prospective owner and explains suitability across different career backgrounds. Purpose alone does not establish commercial competence or replace selection.

• L3, clear enquiry journey: Partially, 2/4. A consultation link and direct email provide contact routes. However, the linked contact page returned 404 and the prospectus page exposed no downloadable document or form in the retrieved response. The readiness assessment could not be retrieved. These limit verification of the complete route without proving that every visitor encounters the same result. No enquiry was submitted.

• L4, discovery before acceptance: Partially, 2/4. A discovery conversation and direct contact with existing owners are encouraged. A full sequence specifying suitability review, financial checks, territory approval and acceptance was not verified publicly. The presence of a discovery call alone is not evidence that every stage is documented and consistently applied.

• L5, opportunity go-to-market plan: Yes, 3/3. The dedicated recruitment website, directory profiles, published operator contacts and consultation routes demonstrate organised promotion of ownership. This supports an approach to reaching applicants without establishing current enquiry volumes, acquisition cost or recruitment outcomes.

Repair and verify the existing prospectus and contact routes. Make current commercial terms and the full mutual-selection process clear before adding further recruitment promotion.

Grow: 6/20. An operating network and active recruitment proposition are visible. The current ownership recruitment engine is less fully evidenced than the support package and should be assessed separately from local activity demand.

• G1, consistent monthly ownership enquiries: Partially, 2.5/5. Current recruitment pages and directory routes establish continuing promotion of ownership. They do not provide a verified monthly series of suitable applicants. Growth in sessions, child participation or commissioned work cannot establish demand to buy a franchise.

• G2, sources and suitable prospects tracked: No public verification, 0/4. No current ownership source-quality report or clearly documented process comparing which channels produce the best candidates was verified. The presence of several promotional channels is not evidence that their quality or commercial return is measured.

• G3, enquiry-to-owner conversion known: No public verification, 0/4. No current defined ownership conversion rate, stage denominator or report linking initial enquiries to accepted agreements was verified. This does not establish that management lacks those records internally. Local customer bookings are a different funnel.

• G4, clear next UK territories: Partially, 1.5/3. Recruitment is territorial and the consumer website lists a national footprint. Public material describes adapting activities to local opportunities. A current prioritised list of next ownership territories or dated rollout sequence was not verified. Existing delivery locations are not automatically available recruitment territories.

• G5, recruitment beyond founder: Partially, 2/4. Named franchise-management roles show capacity beyond Matt Goodman. The published consultation nevertheless specifically directs applicants to the founder, and delegation of continuing applicant conversations was not verified. Local operational responsibility does not itself establish recruitment independence.

Verify monthly suitable ownership demand, source quality and agreement progression through existing records. Clarify recruitment cover and territory priorities before treating the visible network footprint as proof of a predictable growth engine.

Amplify: 14.5/20. The network provides practical help reaching families, schools and commissioners. Full local online coverage, a defined continuing marketing plan and complete owner-level performance reporting remain partly verified.

• AM1, local customer enquiry support: Yes, 5/5. Official provision includes telemarketing, creative support, venue launch help and bid-writing assistance. These are specific routes to generating local opportunities. Funding applications remain applications and do not guarantee awards, profitable contracts or a sufficient volume of customers.

• AM2, online presence for every owner area: Partially, 2/4. The consumer site lists areas and Wolverhampton has a public Eequ activity profile with local details. Complete current local visibility for every unique owner was not reconciled. The Croydon council page restricted retrieval, so its current contents were not assumed from the earlier assessment.

• AM3, marketing after launch: Partially, 2/4. Continuing business guidance and telemarketing are offered, and the School Games account illustrates school outreach supporting later participation. A complete current post-launch marketing timetable with responsibilities and measures was not verified. Useful support and selected examples are not automatically a consistent network-wide plan.

• AM4, individual enquiry and performance tracking: Partially, 1.5/3. Local activity profiles support booking or interest collection by location, providing some evidence of structured registration. A current owner-level system linking enquiries, attendance, repeat participation, revenue and profitability was not verified. A booking platform cannot by itself demonstrate franchisor visibility of the whole customer journey.

• AM5, acquisition beyond personal referrals: Yes, 4/4. Schools, funded provision and public activity listings give routes beyond an owner's personal contacts. The independent School Games account specifically describes Active Future approaching a local partnership with a taster event. That historical example establishes a working route, not a current universal acquisition rate.

Connect available outreach and funding support to bookings, attendance, repeat participation and contribution after delivery costs. Verify local visibility and existing reporting before recommending further systems or advertising.