For-profit or for-purpose: Clickability’s founding reflection
For-profit or for-purpose?
By Aviva Beecher-Kelk · Originally published 5 May 2015
Original article and dated context
Aviva Beecher-Kelk is co-founder and co-director of Clickability. She’s really interested in the interaction between economic and social issues. She’s been told on more than one occasion that she thinks too much.
When we set up Clickability, one of the toughest decisions we had to make was what kind of organisation to become. Should we be a not-for-profit (NFP) or a regular company?
I’ve heard it suggested a few times in the disability community that organisations that are for-profit are evil, unscrupulous scumbags out to make a profit at the cost of participant well-being. I want to have a conversation about it. There are a bunch of different ways to incorporate an organisation, and I don’t think many of them necessarily say much about whether the organisation is “good” or “bad”.
For us it made sense to become a regular company, but it took a bit of reframing for us as to what “for-profit” means – and what it doesn’t have to mean.
There are some differences in what NFPs and regular companies can do with their money, what kind of governance they have to have, and how much tax they pay. (It’s also important to note that a NFP is not the same as a charity.)
But BOTH can pay their employees well or badly. BOTH can do good things for the community. BOTH can have good customer service, or bad evaluation and monitoring. BOTH can earn income. And BOTH can do harm to participants.
We did a lot of research and talked a lot about it. We knew we wanted to be a social enterprise. That means the money we make goes back into the community.
[Clickability update, October 2026: This describes the founder’s intended approach at the time. It is not a universal legal definition of social enterprise or verification of current Clickability profit distribution. ACNC information explains not-for-profit character and the use of profits.]
Lots of people gave us lots of different advice! For example, that our decision should be based on how we’re going to raise initial capital, or on what we’re going to do with the money we make. A disability organisation told us they’d support us only if we were NFP; an accountant told us we’d be taking a step backwards if we were NFP.
In the end, we decided to be for-profit so that our social impact is directly linked to our profit; in other words, the more good we do, the more money we make for the community.
Some people call organisations like ours “social companies” or “for purpose” companies. I think that’s cute! It emphasises the things we think are important about Clickability.
We don’t want Clickability to make money so that we become obscenely rich individuals. We want to make money because we think it’s REALLY important for the community that Clickability is financially sustainable.
It doesn’t mean we don’t care about what we’re doing; on the contrary, if we are financially sustainable, it will mean we can be consistent and provide a high quality service over a long period of time. We think that’s especially important in the disability sector at the moment because everything is changing so much.
It’s been great for us getting started as a for-purpose organisation because it was cheaper and easier. We could make quick decisions, stay lean and be responsive to our stakeholders without having to consult a board. It’s also important to us to be unbiased in the information we present, and we can do that because we are completely unaffiliated.
But there have been some challenges too. For example, we can’t apply for most of the grants and pro-bono services out there because they’re only for NFP organisations.
We are happy to answer any questions and concerns you have about being “for-purpose”. We think it’s a really important conversation to have. What would you have done if you were in our position? What are you doing in your own disability sector start-up?
We want to encourage everyone in the community to make good, informed decisions about the organisations they’re involved with – regardless of whether the organisation is for-purpose, for-profit or NFP. It’s pretty likely that in the next few years a whole lot of new organisations will appear in the disability sector. Some will be right for you, some won’t be. We need to find ways of discerning between them that look past how they’re incorporated.
Clickability editorial update: October 2026
Look for evidence of how a provider works
An organisational label does not tell you whether a service fits your needs. Ask how the provider handles complaints, explains fees and includes you in decisions. Compare the actual service, communication and safeguards rather than assuming that profit status determines quality.
Reviews can help you identify questions to ask, but they are not proof of every claim a provider makes. Read current information and confirm the details relevant to your support. Keep the original founder’s views distinct from your assessment of a provider today.
Explain purpose through specific practices
If your organisation describes itself as for-purpose, show what that means in practice: how decisions are made, how feedback changes services and where readers can find current information. Avoid relying on an attractive label as evidence of outcomes.
Use ACNC guidance when describing not-for-profit status. Financial sustainability and social purpose deserve clear explanations, including the limits of what you are claiming. Historical founder statements should be dated rather than reused as current governance evidence.
Questions readers ask
Can a not-for-profit make a profit?
Yes. The ACNC explains that profits must be directed towards its purposes. Official guidance
Does this article verify today’s Clickability ownership or profit distribution?
No. It preserves a founder’s 2015 account.
Compare providers by the service they offer
Use Clickability’s reviewed and rated profiles to prepare questions about fees, communication and the support you need.
