Draft proposal/No agreement in place/Not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authored on behalf of Utah Valley University.
Draft proposal/No agreement in place/Not affiliated with, endorsed by, or authored on behalf of Utah Valley University.
Your money, your signature, your record.
Two twelve month pilot proposals before Utah Valley University. Make the university's own stored value work everywhere on its own campus. Let students sign what they agree to with a key they hold, and keep it. Give them a digital intelligence they direct rather than one that directs them.
This is a draft. Nothing here is operating, funded or approved. These are proposals submitted by an outside party for the university to evaluate on the merits, and the university may decline them, compete them, or choose someone else entirely. The site exists so the proposals, their complete commercial terms and the conflict of interest behind them can be read by anyone rather than circulated privately.
Published by the proposing party. Not affiliated with, endorsed by or authored on behalf of Utah Valley University.
Every figure is a proposed term, subject to procurement, sponsor budget approval and negotiation.
Nobody can sign up, hold a balance, sign anything or be verified here.
Including the money and the conflict, because a program about trust cannot begin with a governance shortcut.
They can be funded together and run concurrently, or staggered, and neither depends on the other to be worth doing. Concurrent is what we recommend, because verified counterparties and settled payments are what make the second one safe.
Universal acceptance of GreenBucks and the UVU Gift Card everywhere on campus, plus tuition, fees, registration and every ticket the university sells, at no cost to the student. Then a new class of university agreement the student signs with a key they hold, and a portable record built from attestations they choose to present.
Getting to campus, finding somewhere to live including affordable and workforce housing, deciding what to attend, and trading safely with other students. Delivered by an agent that can find, compare and prepare, and that can never spend, disclose or sign without explicit, expiring permission.
The university already runs a closed loop payment system. Every component of a universal campus rail exists today. What is missing is universality, and the ability to sign or prove anything with it.
One acceptance list instead of two that disagree. Campus Store, Wolverine Tech, all of Dining Services, the franchises, the service counters, vending and laundry.
Payable from stored value at zero cost to the student, against the 2.95 percent card service fee a student pays today. Federal aid never flows in, so no cash management arrangement arises.
Stored value as tender at campus ticketing, athletics and the box office, with card processing waived because a closed loop authorization carries no interchange.
Financial responsibility, housing, waivers, internships, consents. Signed over a document hash with a key the student holds, counter-signed by the institution, kept by the student permanently.
Attestations the holder chooses to present: enrolled, agreements completed in good standing, work finished, service given. No number, no rank, no comparable aggregate, and no negative attestations.
Community spaces gated by credential rather than an email domain, federated messaging, and hosted mail and documents on Utah infrastructure. Bounded pilot scope, alongside university systems, never replacing them.
Senate Bill 275 of the 2026 general session enacts Utah Code Title 63A Chapter 20 on one proposition: a state should endorse identity, not create it. Whoever controls the key controls the identity. A campus payment and agreement rail is the most ordinary place in Utah to show that this works in daily life.
Signed agreements rely separately on the Utah Uniform Electronic Transactions Act at Utah Code Title 46 Chapter 4, section 46-4-201, and the federal E-SIGN Act at 15 U.S.C. 7001. Housing matching in Proposal Two is governed by the federal Fair Housing Act and the Utah Fair Housing Act at Utah Code Title 57 Chapter 21. These are advocacy positions offered in support of the proposals and are not legal advice.
Every provider line is hours multiplied by a published rate. Both budgets reconcile to one million dollars exactly. No university appropriated funds, tuition revenue, student fee revenue, auxiliary revenue or stored value float pays the provider during either pilot.
No annual licence for the university to defend in a budget hearing. Card transactions continue at normal charges with no provider margin at all. Rewards and stored value transactions carry a one percent merchant side fee, fifty basis points to the provider and fifty basis points back to the university. It is borne by the accepting merchant and may never be passed through to a student as a surcharge.
On a $3,000 tuition payment a student pays $88.50 by card today. Under this model the student pays nothing, the university pays $30.00 of which $15.00 returns to it, and the net cost is $15.00. The rate is fixed for five years and cannot rise without the university's written consent, with no minimum, no floor and no tail on termination.
Stated as a funded, measured deliverable rather than an aspiration, in each proposal. If both are funded the combined program hires six alumni and six students and targets twelve companies.
Three UVU graduates in business management or engineering, hired for twelve months at a wage that supports an adult rather than a stipend. They arrive already knowing the institution and need no orientation to it. A program that puts its own graduates to work building state infrastructure is a better outcome than any placement statistic. Selection is by the university under its own hiring policy and equal opportunity obligations.
Three current students, paid, embedded in the build alongside the alumni, one pair per venture track. Each fellow must find one paying or committed customer outside the pilot by month six, because a company whose only buyer is the pilot is not a company. Founders own their own intellectual property outright.
The delivery company for the program is staffed and operated by UVU alumni, with a committed path to alumni ownership. A delivery lead who took the same classes and paid the same fees needs no orientation to the environment they are integrating with, and a firm whose operators came out of the program has a reason to care whether the six ventures survive the funding.
The award funds twelve months of integration work. It does not fund the platform, which already exists and is contributed at no charge, with its specifications published so the six companies and any competitor can build against them. The proposals also ask the university to host production infrastructure permanently, with fellows on the operations rotation.
Capability ships in the existing Utah Life App and surfaces inside the university's current student application, in the tiles it already has: the tasks tile that today says get your card, the balance tile, the events tile. Students should not have to learn a new place to find something the university already taught them where to find.
A UVU Life App, built under university brand standards with the university owning the mark and its front end systems matched, once the capability is proven and the integrations are certified. By then it is a packaging exercise rather than a research project, which is the correct order to do it in.
Proposal One introduces agreements signed over a document hash with a key the signer holds. The obvious place to demonstrate that is on the proposals themselves. Once signing is stood up, every document below will carry a scannable code resolving to its signed record, so any reader can confirm the version in their hands is the version filed, by the party who claims to have filed it, unaltered since.
Every status above is accurate today. No document has been signed, no letter of commitment has been obtained, and the technology schedule is not complete. They are listed in that state deliberately.
One of the key individuals proposing this work is the founder of the companies that would be paid for it, and has accepted the role of Chair of the university's Industry Advisory Board. Both facts are disclosed in writing to the university's procurement office, in a letter filed separately from the proposals and before any evaluation begins.
That letter is not a formality. It commits the interested party to recuse from every procurement, contracting, budget and funding decision touching this program, to leave the room for any board discussion of it, to refrain from soliciting advocacy from board members, and to support a competitive solicitation without seeking an exemption. The recusal takes effect on signature and requires nobody's acceptance.
It does not select vendors, award funds or direct procurement.
Selection and negotiation rest entirely with the university.
Budget, rates, revenue share and this disclosure, published in full.
Every invoice and revenue share calculation, by the university and the sponsor, at any time.
Priced in advance so no future renewal is negotiated under time pressure with an incumbent.
No equity, no assignment, no right of first refusal.
