Federated technology atlas

Nine schools, one network, many tools.

A living map of every platform deployed across Outward Bound USA and its nine regional schools — and the integrations, gaps, and overlaps that decide whether national-led change feels like infrastructure or interference.

Unique platforms
%
Stack alignment
%
Map completeness
01 — Snapshot

The stack at a glance

A federated network's complexity isn't just the count of tools — it's the count of different tools doing the same job, plus the gaps where some schools have no tool at all. Each metric below points to a different kind of opportunity.

Aligned
Same platform across reporting orgs
Diverged
Multiple platforms doing the same job
National-only
OBUSA has it; schools don't
Confirmed gaps
Schools with no solution (budget, capacity, or awareness)
Unknowns
Cells we still need to confirm with schools

Productivity ecosystem

The Microsoft 365 vs. Google Workspace split that decides how shared deliverables, file formats, and collaboration tools will or won't render.

Stack composition

How the rows of the matrix are distributed today.

Top alignment opportunities

Subcategories where one platform decision could collapse the most fragmentation. Multi-tool portfolios (AI, transcription) are excluded — those aren't misalignments.

Top coverage gaps

Subcategories where one or more schools have confirmed they have no solution. A different conversation from misalignment — about access, awareness, and risk exposure.

Three opportunity shapes. Diverged = collapse the platform count. Gaps = expand coverage to schools without it. Unknown = run a 30-minute survey per school. Each demands a different conversation, a different budget conversation, and a different success metric.
02 — Alignment matrix

Who's running what, where

Each row is a job to be done; each column is an organization, badged with its productivity ecosystem. Cells are colored by the alignment status of that row. ✕ Gap = surveyed and no solution. Dashed empty cell = not yet surveyed. Click any cell or row to drill in.

Filter:
Category:
03 — Dependency map

The wiring underneath

Platforms only deliver value through the integrations between them. This is the live network — pulled from your architecture diagrams — of how data, identity, and money flow. Toggle an organization to see how the picture fractures when its choices diverge from OBUSA's.

View as

Highlight

Identity / CDP core
Source-of-record
Channel / activation
Form / payment
Surface / website
Operations / other

Reading the picture. Solid lines are integrations live across the federation; dashed red lines are connections that break for the selected school because they've adopted a different platform for that job. Every dashed line is a workaround, a manual export, or a dropped capability.
04 — Cost of drift

What divergence is costing

A federation with N platforms doing the same job carries up to N × (N − 1) / 2 integration paths, plus a real annual dollar cost in licenses, admin time, and connector maintenance. Toggle the alignment scenarios to see both numbers move.

Scenarios

Each toggle represents an alignment decision the federation could make. The math doesn't care which side of the debate you're on; it cares about the count.

Today, the federation maintains

paths

distinct integration paths across the categories where schools have diverged. Each path is at minimum: one connector, one identity model, one consent reconciliation, one place to debug.

integration paths could be retired with the alignment decisions toggled at left.

04a — Dollar estimate

Translating drift into dollars

Adjust the assumption sliders to match your federation's reality. The estimate updates live and reflects whichever scenarios are toggled at the top of this section.

Assumptions

$12,000
6%
$95,000
$3,000

Estimated annual hidden cost of misalignment

$—
Low–high range using ±35% on the assumptions: $— to $—
$— potential annual savings if every scenario at left is aligned. Realized savings depend on actual contract structures and what's reinvested elsewhere.
The harder number this doesn't capture. Every divergent platform also has a champion, a vendor relationship, a renewal cycle, and a tribal knowledge silo. National can absorb that cost for one or two; not for nine times that. The dollar figure above is conservative — the real ceiling is the bandwidth of your team.
05 — Playbook

Moving from snapshot to roadmap

A federated network's appetite for alignment is finite. Spend it on the categories where the integration math is brutal and the school-level lift is low — and treat coverage gaps as a separate conversation.

Tier 1 — Land first

Identity & data plumbing

Salesforce, Segment, Snowflake, OneTrust — already largely aligned. Lock it in as a non-negotiable so nothing downstream has to be rebuilt.

Tier 2 — Real fight

Lifecycle marketing / ESP

Braze, Constant Contact, Mailchimp, ActiveCampaign in play simultaneously. The most fragmented row in the matrix and the highest dollar cost. Propose Braze as the federation default with a 12-month migration runway.

Tier 3 — Document, don't legislate

Productivity ecosystem

M365 vs. Google Workspace is mostly a school-by-school heritage choice. Catalog it; don't try to flip it. Make sure shared deliverables work in both formats.

Tier 4 — Govern, don't standardize

Multi-tool portfolios

AI assistants, transcription tools, payment gateways. Schools combine multiples for different reasons — that's a portfolio, not a misalignment. Govern data exposure and procurement, not vendor selection.

Tier 5 — Confirm

The blank cells

A meaningful share of the matrix is still unknown. Each blank is a future surprise. A 30-minute survey per school, mapped against this matrix, retires most of them and surfaces real gaps that need addressing.

Tier 6 — Address gaps

Coverage holes

Where schools have confirmed they have no tool at all — donor prospecting, surveys, signature, scheduling — that's an access conversation, not an alignment one. National-funded shared seats are often the cheapest path.