Watch our conversation with Mohamed Abdallah, co-founder of Connections for Seniors, whose organization turned $12,000 in seed money into $24 million in assets by adopting innovative organizational culture and structure.
As a part of the Centre knowledge sharing series, this session explores how adopting an entrepreneurial mindset, rather than a program management one, can strengthen financial resilience and unlock new pathways for sustainability.
Participants gained concrete insights into leveraging diversified revenues, integrating social enterprise models, and aligning financial strategy with long-term mission goals.
“This is the mindset shift that we would like to see. You cannot resolve or solve 21st century problems or social problems with 1980s operating logic. That logic needs to have a shift, and that’s what we’re trying to talk about today.” Mohamed Abdallah, Connections for Seniors
Want to learn more? Here are some additional resources.
- Collaborative leadership and governance article series
- Creating and maintaining a social enterprise
- NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) toolkit Newfoundland
- “It’s not going to be done just by the Homelessness Sector”: Homelessness Prevention 101
- Four scenarios for the future of housing, health and aging in Canada
- Browse our Resource Inventory for more.
Follow up on the attendees’ questions
The Prime Minister is talking a lot about housing. Have you been successful with Federal Funding?
Yes, we have been successful in accessing federal funding, particularly where our projects align with national priorities such as Housing First, seniors’ housing, and aging-in-place strategies. Federal funding tends to favour projects that are shovel-ready, partnership-driven, and outcomes-focused. Our success has come from presenting strong pro formas, clear community need data, and demonstrating system-level collaboration. That said, federal funding remains competitive and structured, so long-term sustainability still requires diversified revenue beyond grants alone.
With the example offered of “scaling up income” if you do engage with government and receive funding, but it is always for a term period and not renewable, how do you work around this? Is it best to design the program knowing that you will need to make cuts or “scale down”?
This is a critical design question. We approach term funding as catalytic capital — not permanent operating revenue. Programs are built with one of three pathways in mind: 1. Transition to earned revenue; 2. Integration into core operating budgets; or 3. Planned sunset with measurable outcomes.
It is risky to build permanent staffing structures on temporary funds without a sustainability bridge. Scenario planning from the outset is essential. We design with scalability in mind — both upward and downward — so the organization is never destabilized by funding cycles.
It would be good to have some concrete examples of social enterprises and how you are actually making money. Do you charge for some services for example?
We operate mission-aligned enterprises that both serve clients and generate income. Examples include transportation services, property management, and fee-for-service program delivery. Another example: with approximately $800,000 in social enterprise funding, we purchased an event space that generates revenue. That space now supports programming, hires staff, and creates ongoing income for the organization. In some cases, we charge modest fees (e.g., transportation or housing-related services), while maintaining subsidy pathways for low-income clients. The goal is blended value: financial sustainability alongside social impact.
The key principle is that enterprises must reinforce — not distract from — the core mission.
