Gifts, grants, contracts and fees are the four streams Week 5 examines in MBAX 6850; the revenue mix analysis weighs what each funder expects back and how concentrated the mix is. Searches like "mbax 6850 week 5 assignment example", "mbax6850 week 5 sample" and "mbax 6850 week 5 example" land here.
What a finished MBAX 6850 Week 5 revenue mix analysis looks like
A revenue table opens the analysis, all amounts illustrative: a state adult education contract $1.6 million, foundation grants $1.0 million, individual gifts $0.8 million, workplace literacy fees from local employers $0.4 million, and events $0.2 million. Beside each stream sit three columns: who decides whether it continues, what that decider expects in return, and how restricted the money is. The contract pays per learner served and carries reporting on test gains; foundation grants fund named projects for two or three years; individual gifts are the least restricted. An analysis section applies Salamon's voluntary failure argument to explain why government money became the largest stream. A second section applies Foster, Kim and Christiansen's funding models and concludes the organization has a leading source but no model built around it. Concentration risk closes the analysis.
How a MBAX 6850 Week 5 example is structured
Streams are listed by size in the table, the order in which a funder or board would first read them, but the analysis departs from that order once the columns do their work. The three columns, decider, expectation and restriction, turn a list of amounts into a map of obligations, the question this week actually poses. Salamon comes before Foster, Kim and Christiansen because he explains how the mix arose: voluntary giving alone could not fund services at this scale, so government stepped in and nonprofit delivery followed. The funding models argument then asks where the mix should go, a forward-looking question that belongs second. The concentration section closes the analysis by combining both: the stream the organization depends on most is renewed by a legislature it cannot influence, a point the board needs before any fundraising plan.
Five streams, round figures
The $4 million total is split across a state contract, foundations, individuals, employer fees and events, each amount marked illustrative.
What each funder expects back
Learner counts and test gains for the state, project reports for foundations, updates for individual donors; the column makes obligations visible.
Restriction, stream by stream
Individual gifts are the least restricted dollars in the budget, which gives them value beyond their share of the total.
Salamon on how government became the largest funder
Voluntary failure, the insufficiency of charity alone to fund services at scale, explains why a public contract now leads the mix.
A leading source without a model
Foster, Kim and Christiansen's argument is used to ask whether the organization has built capabilities around its biggest stream, and the answer is not yet.
Where marks go in MBAX 6850 Week 5
The column of expectations carries this analysis. A mix reported as percentages, however accurate, tells a board only what it already knows from the audit; showing what each funder wants in return is what turns the table into analysis. Theory is marked on fit. Salamon's voluntary failure explains government funding of nonprofits, and using it to explain individual giving misapplies it; Foster, Kim and Christiansen's work is about matching a dominant source to capabilities, and citing it as a call to diversify reverses its point. Graders at this level know both, so misreadings cost more than omissions. Restriction deserves precise treatment, since calling a government contract a grant, or unrestricted gifts restricted, confuses obligations the later weeks depend on. Invented figures pass only when labeled as such.
Get a MBAX 6850 Week 5 example written to your instructions
Share the revenue prompt, the rubric and the Form 990 filing year your figures come from; the mix is then analyzed stream by stream within 24 to 48 hours, first one free. The literacy organization's funders and their amounts are illustrative inventions, not drawn from any charity's filings.
MBAX 6850 Week 5 questions, answered
How does a grant differ from a contract here?
In the example, a grant funds a project the organization proposed, with reporting on what was done, while the state contract purchases a service, paid per learner, with performance terms the funder sets. The distinction matters because contracts tend to shape the program more directly. Your own analysis should follow the terms in the actual agreements or filings you are citing.
Does Foster, Kim and Christiansen's work mean the organization should stop diversifying?
Not exactly. Their argument is that nonprofits reaching large scale usually depend on one dominant type of funding and build capabilities to secure it, rather than spreading effort evenly. The example uses that to ask whether the literacy organization has organized itself around its biggest stream. A board might still choose diversification for resilience, and the analysis can say so.
Where would real revenue figures come from?
For a real organization, from its Form 990, which reports revenue by broad category, and from audited financial statements, which often break it down further. Annual reports add detail but are self-published. Every amount in the example was invented and carries an illustrative label; an analysis of an actual charity would cite the filing year for each amount it uses.