In this Startup Gateway webinar hosted by Mary Yazdani (GenesisLink) with guest speaker Michael Dearden (Roseview Global Incubator), the discussion focused on what actually makes a Start-Up Visa (SUV) file credible — from precision documentation and designated-organization due diligence to remote traction proof, hiring plans, and proactive file management during long processing timelines.

Rather than treating the SUV as a one-time submission, the session emphasized building a living evidence system that stays consistent across the Letter of Support (LOS), work permits, PR processing, and landing.

Setting the Standard: Documentation Is the Foundation

Mary opened with a clear message: strong SUV files are built on evidence precision, complete documentation, and real-world proof — not vague claims.

She framed the webinar as a practical roadmap:

• What designated organizations (DOs) and IRCC expect to see
• Where weak files typically fall apart
• How founders can demonstrate traction even before arriving in Canada

A recurring theme was GenesisLink’s “single source of truth” approach — helping founders, consultants, and DOs stay aligned through one structured evidence folder that evolves over time.

What Designated Organizations Look for (and Why It Matters)

Michael explained Roseview’s baseline requirements:

• Full business plan
• Pitch deck
• Financials (company + personal)
• Founder CVs
• Language results
• Traction evidence (from Canada or the home market)

This documentation is what enables Roseview to write a strong commitment certificate and issue an LOS with confidence.

One point was emphasized clearly:

“We spend a lot of time working on the commitment certificate…
We don’t ask our clients to do it.”

Roseview prepares the commitment certificate internally to ensure consistency and quality.

The Biggest Gaps: Traction and Financials

When asked what tends to be weak even in otherwise strong applications, Michael highlighted two recurring gaps:

• Financial clarity
  (business funding readiness + personal capacity to sustain)
• Client traction evidence
  (proof the market actually wants the solution)

“The two — financials and client traction — are critical.”

Mary noted that founders often struggle to present financial realities cleanly, especially when navigating different tax systems and reporting standards internationally.

What “Best-in-Class” Due Diligence Looks Like at a DO

Michael walked through Roseview’s multi-stage due diligence process:

• Structured application intake via their platform
• Review of:
  • 40–50 page business plan
  • Pitch deck
  • Company and personal financials
  • Cap table
  • Language results
  • Founder CVs
• Founder-only interview (1 hour, no advisors)
• Additional interviews with partners covering:
  • Financial assumptions (accountant partner)
  • Pitch clarity and positioning (communications/branding partner)
  • Execution feasibility (Michael’s focus)

A notable insight: historically, many applicants never reached due diligence because they were not ready — though that is changing as the bar rises.

Red Flags That Kill Files Early

From an investor-style lens, Michael emphasized the number-one filter: the team.

If founders:

• Can’t explain the business clearly
• Don’t demonstrate execution ability
• Appear to be presenting an idea that isn’t genuinely theirs

…the file becomes high-risk very quickly.

“There are lots of good ideas out there — but if the team can’t execute, they’re going to fail.”

He also flagged a broader trend: the program is shifting toward more mature companies, not just early ideation.

The 5 Key Documents Consultants Should Prioritize

Michael’s shortlist focused on credibility and readiness:

1. Business plan (coherent, realistic — not AI-generated fluff)
2. Financial evidence (company + founders; realistic market-entry costs)
3. Founder CVs (clear business and execution experience)
4. Language tests
5. Traction proof (even if outside Canada)

He added a practical note: experienced reviewers can often tell very quickly what is real versus manufactured.

Remote Traction: What Proof Works Before Founders Land

Because many founders operate abroad for long periods, remote traction was a major focus.

Michael highlighted the strongest signals:

• Home-market traction (sales, pilots, adoption)
• A team member already in Canada (when possible)
• Letters of intent and partnership signals
• Outreach evidence and customer conversations
• Feedback loops showing iteration and learning

Mary raised a common concern:
“If we show too much traction abroad, will IRCC ask why we need Canada?”

Michael reframed this clearly:

“Global reach is an important criterion…
The networks applicants bring to Canada are a feature, not a flaw.”

Banking & Incorporation Barriers: A Reality Check

Michael spoke candidly about a recurring challenge: founders may be ready to operate in Canada but are blocked by banking and incorporation barriers due to visa delays.

“Huge frustration… They’re going to pay taxes — and because of the system, they can’t go into business.”

The most realistic workaround seen in practice:

• Using a lawyer, trusted advisor, or family member in Canada to support incorporation and banking where appropriate

Mary noted that GenesisLink is exploring future webinars with banking-sector participants — but only after solutions are properly validated.

Evidence Blueprint: Phase-by-Phase What to Build

Phase A: Pre-LOS — Fit, Feasibility & Financial Readiness

Michael highlighted three core SUV criteria that must be clearly demonstrated:

• Innovation
• Global potential
• Hiring Canadians (with a real plan)

He noted that many files:

• Fail to explain innovation in a Canadian context
• Omit staffing entirely — only to be questioned later

“More and more, IRCC is looking for a hiring plan.”

Phase B: Post-LOS — Proving Credibility

This stage focuses on continuous progress:

• Cap table and compliance alignment
• Product roadmap development
• Market outreach evidence (who you contacted and how you validated)
• Logical spending progression (e.g., marketing, website, product work)

Work Permit Stage — Operating Signals & Hiring Logic

Mary asked a critical question:
What if founders can’t hire in Canada due to work permit refusals and must rely on global contractors?

Michael’s guidance:

• Structure hiring plans by milestones, not dates
• Acknowledge that global contracting is normal, especially in tech

PR Stage — Sustained Traction & Proactive Readiness

Michael emphasized staying ready for short-notice IRCC requests (sometimes as little as 14 days), including maintaining up-to-date:

• Police checks
• Language results
• Medical and travel documentation
• Settlement and financial records (often six-month validity windows)

Landing Stage — Continuity & Compliance

Mary added that once landing occurs, files benefit from showing continuity evidence such as:

• Payroll and employer accounts
• Business registrations and required licenses (where applicable)
• Operational proof that the plan is being executed inside Canada

What This Webinar Repeatedly Reinforced

One message stayed consistent throughout the session:

SUV success is less about perfect storytelling and more about credible, traceable execution evidence — organized in a way that makes it easy for DOs and IRCC to trust the file.

The strongest files share these traits:

• Real plan
• Real founders
• Real traction proof
• Consistent documentation
• Proactive readiness over time

“Don’t talk about it as an immigration program.
Talk about it as an economic development program.”

Key Takeaways for Consultants and Founders

• Financials and traction proof are the most common weak points
• DO due diligence is increasingly investor-style — execution matters
• Build a single source of truth evidence folder that evolves across stages
• Remote traction is not a risk when positioned as global expansion into Canada
• Hiring plans should be milestone-based, not date-based
• Stay proactive — IRCC may request updates on short timelines
• Strong designated organizations stay engaged long-term, and that responsiveness can protect PR outcomes