How to Apply to Berkeley SkyDeck with Finta

To prepare a Berkeley SkyDeck application, first distinguish its funded Cohort route from Pad-13, then build a brief that connects your company stage, evidence, and goals to the relevant program. Start at the official SkyDeck application page; the worksheet below helps you prepare rather than submit an application.

Application status checked October 22, 2026: the official page says Batch 24 applications open in January. Its remaining detailed timeline concerns Batch 23, whose application window ended August 21, 2026. A complete new deadline and timezone were not confirmed. Do not use the old batch's dates as the next window.

This is an independent Finta preparation guide. Finta is not affiliated with Berkeley SkyDeck, and using the worksheet or Aurora does not affect admission.

In this guide

• Choose a track before polishing answers
• Build a company brief from evidence
• Worked example: choose a development goal
• Use Aurora for a review pass
• Check the live form before submission
• Common questions
• Your next step

What you will prepare

• A track choice with a clear reason.
• A company-evidence brief you can adapt to the current form.
• A list of unresolved terms, logistics, and application questions.

Choose a track before polishing answers

The official program descriptions distinguish Cohort participation from Pad-13's resource model. They also encourage global applicants. Do not assume that every track offers the same investment, workspace, mentoring, or presentation opportunities. The current form and offer documents govern your actual route.

Decision	Cohort preparation	Pad-13 preparation	Your verification
Company stage	Explain why the company can use an intensive acceleration period.	Explain the development work you need before a larger fundraising step.	Current prototype, customers, funding and next milestone.
Resources	Identify the required participation and resources described for the Cohort.	Identify which resources are included and which are not.	Official track description with access date.
Capital	Read the current investment documents rather than relying on a headline amount.	Do not treat access to the program as a promised investment.	Separate program participation from any fund decision.
Presence and time	Plan who attends required activities.	Check the applicable access and attendance rules.	Founder availability, travel costs and unresolved questions.

A useful track rationale is specific: “We can demonstrate the prototype, but need to validate a repeatable buyer before raising an institutional round.” “We want a famous accelerator” does not explain what work the program would help you complete.

Build a company brief from evidence

1. Describe the user and problem. Name who experiences the problem, what they do now, and what remains difficult. Separate interviews from observed usage.
2. Show the product's current state. Label a live product, prototype, simulation, or concept accurately. Include a dated demonstration you can explain without an elaborate setup.
3. Define traction. Distinguish paying customers, free pilots, waitlist names and informal interest. Use an exact period and counting method for each number.
4. Explain team execution. Connect each founder's relevant work to a decision or milestone. Do not substitute a long biography for evidence that the team can build.
5. Name the next milestone. Choose a concrete uncertainty you could reduce during the program. Explain what result would change your plan.

Company-evidence worksheet

Application topic	Your current answer	Supporting evidence	Unresolved issue	Owner
Customer and pain	[Specific user and repeated problem]	[Dated interviews or workflow observation]	[What has not been tested?]	[Founder]
Product	[What works today]	[Demo and scope of test]	[Prototype limits]	[Builder]
Commercial progress	[Defined customer or pilot count and period]	[Permitted records]	[Unpaid versus paid]	[Commercial lead]
Program fit	[Track and specific development goal]	[Current official track page]	[Attendance or terms question]	[Applicant]

Worked example: choose a development goal

Fictional example: CanalAware is building sensors for small water utilities. Two founders have tested a bench prototype and interviewed maintenance managers. The company has no paying customer. Its initial draft says, “Our validated technology is ready to transform municipal infrastructure.” That overstates what the evidence supports.

A more useful draft is: “We have a bench prototype and interviews with maintenance managers. We need to test whether installation and calibration fit a utility's maintenance process. Our next milestone is a documented field-test plan with a willing utility and a clear comparison against the current inspection process.”

The revision does not make the company more advanced. It makes the current stage and next learning task clear. The founders would then compare that task with current track requirements and ask SkyDeck about any uncertain fit. They should not invent a pilot to make a track appear appropriate.

Use Aurora for a review pass

Keep the evidence table alongside your draft. In Finta, you can provide the text you want Aurora to review and ask for missing evidence, ambiguous claims, and a clearer sequence. The same exercise can be tried in another assistant. Review suggested wording against your records; an assistant cannot decide your eligibility or confirm an unpublished cohort.

Copyable AI practice prompt

Try this with Aurora AI in Finta, Claude, or Codex. Supply only information you are authorized to share. Tool access and capabilities differ; review the output yourself.

Review my Berkeley SkyDeck preparation brief for human review.
Selected track and official page: [track, URL, date checked]
Company stage and product: [facts]
Customer evidence with dates: [authorized evidence]
Current draft: [text]
Constraints: [attendance, location, unresolved terms]
Return a table with claim, evidence, uncertainty, and proposed revision. Separate confirmed program requirements from my assumptions. Flag unsupported traction and track mismatches. Suggest three questions I should verify with the program. Do not invent eligibility, funding terms, deadlines, customers or admission odds. Do not submit forms, send messages, or change records.

Check the live form before submission

• Confirm the current batch, track names, application route and deadline.
• Read the terms and attendance obligations for the route actually offered.
• Match dates and traction definitions across the application and supporting materials.
• Remove private customer information unless sharing is authorized and necessary.
• Have a founder review every answer and submit through SkyDeck's official channel.

Common questions

Do I need a UC affiliation?

The pages checked encourage global applicants, so a UC affiliation is not a universal requirement. Check the current track and any specialized route rather than relying on an old eligibility summary.

Is Pad-13 the same as the funded Cohort?

No. The official descriptions distinguish their resources and investment arrangements. Read the relevant program and fund documents before comparing economics.

Can I prepare while the next window is not announced?

Yes. Customer evidence, a truthful product explanation and founder availability remain useful. Leave unpublished dates unknown and recheck the official page before submitting.

Your next step

Complete the evidence table and decide what you need to verify about the track. For broader options, use Finta's startup accelerator directory. If your application needs supporting slides, adapt the existing send-ahead deck guide rather than adding a generic deck where the form does not request one.

Sources and review

Official sources checked October 22, 2026. Recheck the selected program before relying on an application window, eligibility rule, or term.

• Berkeley SkyDeck official application page
• Berkeley SkyDeck program and track descriptions