How to Partner
with ECAHLI.

ECAHLI Global Holdings is the Dutch Stichting platform steward that sits above all individual ECAHLI Node SPVs. It owns the intellectual property — the node design framework, governance architecture, and replication methodology. It provides the institutional continuity layer that connects all nodes: the governance backbone, the development stewardship function, and the platform-level relationships with DFIs, governments, and institutional partners.

Every ECAHLI Node is developed under licence from and governance coordination with Global Holdings. The stewardship fee (USD 1.506M per node, milestone-linked) and the HQ waterfall share from each Node's operating cash flow are the primary economic flows into the holding structure. As more Nodes are deployed, the Global Holdings economic base compounds.

All economics, governance rights, and capital commitments for Global Holdings seats are defined in formal binding documentation. Nothing here constitutes a legal offer or commitment.

A Global Holdings seat involves three things: a capital commitment at holding level, a governance role in the platform (IC participation, pipeline co-design, and strategic direction-setting), and participation in the HoldCo economics — the development stewardship fees and HQ waterfall share that flow through Global Holdings across every deployed Node.

The seat is not a passive investment. Partners with seats are expected to be active contributors to the platform's institutional architecture — bringing credibility, relationships, expertise, or capital that helps the network scale. They are co-stewards, not co-investors in a fund.

Global Holdings seats are designed for organisations with:

• Long-horizon mandates — 10–25 years — aligned with the platform's deployment timeline
• Institutional credibility that can anchor the network with DFIs, governments, and co-investors globally
• Capital capacity to commit at platform level (not just at individual Node level)
• Governance appetite — a genuine interest in helping shape the pipeline, not passive capital placement
• Mission alignment with integrated regenerative community development across Africa, Latin America, and Asia

Likely fit: large impact-aligned family offices, sovereign wealth funds with ESG mandates, development foundations, multilateral strategic partners, and mission-driven institutional investors.

Seat availability is limited to 5 remaining positions. Enquiries are handled under NDA on invitation basis. Contact investment@ecahli.com to initiate.

The 2 filled seats have shaped the working model for what Global Holdings partnership looks like in practice. They demonstrate that meaningful institutional engagement at platform level is achievable and that aligned partners can contribute genuinely to the governance and development of the network, not just add capital.

The 5 remaining seats are complementary, not identical — each new partner brings a different capability, mandate, or geographic focus that strengthens the overall holding structure. The composition of the remaining 5 is intentional: ECAHLI is looking for complementary institutional profiles, not replications of existing seats.

Each ECAHLI Node is developed within a dedicated local SPV — a registered operating entity in the relevant jurisdiction with its own board, Investment Committee, CEO, governance documentation, and capital stack. The SPV is where partners commit capital, where operations are governed, and where returns are generated and distributed.

ECAHLI Global Holdings participates in each SPV through a governance and stewardship relationship — not as the operating entity. This means node-level partners are engaging a locally governed, jurisdiction-specific legal structure, not the Dutch Stichting directly. Independent legal advice for the relevant jurisdiction is essential before committing.

Envelopes differ by node and are always negotiated within the node's specific financial model and legal framework. The following are indicative of the Kisumu base-case structure — not standard terms applicable to all Nodes:

These are indicative Kisumu-aligned envelopes. Actual terms, ticket sizes, and availability differ by Node and by development stage. All arrangements are subject to Node-specific legal documentation and formal agreement. Not guaranteed returns.

Yes, in principle. A partner might hold a Global Holdings seat — providing platform-level governance participation and HoldCo economic exposure — while also participating in one or more Node SPVs through equity, DFI debt, or strategic partnership envelopes. These are structured as separate, distinct legal arrangements with different governance and economic rights.

The combination can be powerful: holding-level visibility into the full pipeline combined with direct operational and financial exposure in specific Nodes where the partner's mandate or expertise is most relevant. Whether this dual-level structure makes sense for a given partner depends on their mandate, capital capacity, and the development stage of relevant Nodes.

Envelope sizes vary materially by Node — driven by local CapEx levels, the regulatory and financing environment, land costs, and the specific capital stack design for that geography. The Kisumu base-case CapEx of USD 73.1M generates the specific envelope sizes described above. A Paraguay Node at USD 58.8M CapEx, or a Brazil Node at USD 78.1M, will have different absolute envelope sizes even if the structural proportions are similar.

This means a DFI considering participation across multiple Nodes cannot assume uniform ticket sizes or terms. Each Node's capital stack is independently modelled, structured, and documented. Cross-Node framework agreements — covering multiple Nodes under common terms — are possible in principle for Global Holdings partners, subject to formal agreement.

The Kisumu v29 base case — the current proof-of-concept for the ECAHLI model — produces the following modelled equity return profile for T1 equity partners:

Beyond financial economics, Global Holdings partners receive:

• Pipeline visibility: access to the full Node development pipeline across Africa, Latin America, and Asia before it becomes publicly available — enabling advance positioning in relevant geographies
• Platform co-design: meaningful input into which geographies and Node models come next, and how the replication architecture evolves
• Institutional positioning: association with a first-of-its-kind, award-winning community development platform with growing DFI and government relationships
• IP and data access: proprietary node design frameworks, MRV data infrastructure, and platform knowledge base rights across the network
• SDG and impact reporting: verifiable, Node-level impact data across housing, employment, healthcare, education, and carbon — useful for institutional ESG and impact reporting obligations

Each ECAHLI Node is designed to produce verifiable community outcomes. The Kisumu base case illustrates the indicative per-Node impact profile:

• 450 homes per Node — 250 community homes + 200 Wandiga-style affordable housing
• 1,975-job employment ecosystem (direct + indirect + SME/farming supply chain)
• 395 permanent direct jobs at 2.5× Kenya minimum wage (Kisumu base)
• 15,000 patients/year served by the on-Node clinic
• 200 TVET students/year trained for roles inside the Node
• 25,000 tCO₂e/year removed or avoided — MRV-verified, ITMO-eligible
• 480t plastic diverted per year; 143t organics composted; 52,000 native plants/year

For partners carrying DFI mandates, SDG reporting obligations, climate commitments, or ESG targets, these outcomes are structural features of the Node — not supplementary commitments. Commercial performance and impact outcomes are designed to reinforce each other.

All figures are Kisumu base-case illustrations. Actual outcomes depend on Node-specific conditions, execution, and community development trajectory. Not guaranteed for all Nodes.

Global Holdings partners participate in platform governance through defined board/IC roles, supermajority thresholds on major platform changes, pipeline co-design participation, and strategic input into the Node sequencing and replication architecture. Specific governance rights — voting thresholds, information rights, veto provisions on material decisions — are defined in the Dutch Stichting governance documentation and the formal seat agreement.

The CEO (Petrus Van Der Merwe, Founder and Lifelong Chair) holds executive authority. The HoldCo board — including seated partners — holds oversight authority on material decisions. No single principal, including the Founder, can make unilateral changes to the Node pipeline, capital structure, or governance architecture without board/IC concurrence at the relevant threshold.

Node SPVs are governed under a five-tier capital constitution with defined IC approval thresholds. Key investor protections include:

• Milestone-linked capital deployment — tranches released against verified milestones, not on a time basis
• Movement IV module activation requires a separate IC resolution — no module is activated without IC approval
• Development stewardship fee (USD 1.506M) paid in tranches, milestone-linked — not upfront
• No hidden royalties or founder economics beyond disclosed stewardship fee
• DFI co-investment creates external institutional accountability — DFIs do not co-invest without independent governance review

All governance rights — voting, information, consent, and approval thresholds — are defined in formal binding documentation. No protection can be assumed from general descriptions or this Q&A page.

Movement IV is the governed upside expansion platform for each ECAHLI Node: 10 optional modules (greenhouse cluster, organics factory, apiary & spirulina, veterinary clinic, plastic recycling, cold-chain hub, materials production, energy expansion, skills academy, aviation support) that can be activated once the base Node is stable and generating revenue.

Every module is OFF by default. Each requires a separate IC resolution to activate and is separately capitalised. In aggregate across all 10 modules: +USD 12.37M CapEx · +USD 4.99M Y5 revenue · +USD 7.545M Y10 revenue · +148 direct jobs. Movement IV does not change the base-case IRR (16.5%) or DSCR (2.80×).

For partners, Movement IV is important because it demonstrates that the governance architecture is designed to protect the base-case investment while providing structured upside — not embedded return assumptions that inflate base-case projections. Governed upside instruments, not optimistic modelling.

Exit provisions — including transfer rights, tag-along/drag-along mechanisms, buyout rights, and refinancing exit events — are defined in the Node SPV documentation and vary by investor class and ticket size. Node equity is illiquid. There is no liquid secondary market. The primary exit event in the base case is a Year 10 refinancing or strategic sale, consistent with the 3.65× MOIC projection.

Partners should not commit to Node equity with the assumption that a specific exit mechanism is available at a specific price or timing without confirming this in formal legal documentation reviewed by independent counsel.

ECAHLI actively welcomes PPP structures with national and county governments, development agencies, and relevant public bodies. Each Node delivers significant public goods — employment, housing, healthcare, food security, education, and climate outcomes — that align naturally with government mandates.

PPP structures may involve: land provision, infrastructure co-funding, regulatory facilitation, concessional capital, or formal government off-take arrangements (e.g., healthcare, education, housing schemes). In Kisumu, active engagement with the County Government of Kisumu and CSTI Kenya provides the PPP anchoring for the first Node. All PPP structures are governed by formal agreements under the relevant jurisdiction's law.

The Kisumu 40/30/15/15 capital stack — equity, DFI concessional debt, grants, and carbon revenue — compresses the overall cost of capital while maintaining a 16.5% base equity IRR. The DFI debt at ~6% p.a. is the critical compression mechanism: by replacing what would otherwise be commercial debt at 12–18%, the blended stack makes the equity IRR viable at a responsible risk level.

For private equity partners, the blended stack means their capital is deployed alongside institutional-grade concessional finance and verified public-good outputs — reducing the cost of capital relative to a pure-equity structure. For DFI partners, the equity tranch absorbs the first-loss position, making the concessional debt risk profile manageable against their credit standards.

DFIs can participate beyond the debt tranche through: equity co-investment (blended equity alongside commercial equity), grant facilities for TVET, healthcare, or climate MRV infrastructure, technical assistance programmes aligned to Node zones, carbon credit pre-purchase or forward-finance arrangements, and in some cases guarantee structures that de-risk specific node revenue streams for commercial co-investors.

DFIs with broader Africa, Latin America, or Asia mandates may also participate at Global Holdings level — where their institutional presence anchors the platform's DFI relationships across the full node pipeline. The IFC and AfDB pathway conversations currently underway are focused on Kisumu specifically, with longer-term platform alignment under discussion.

The formal partnership engagement process has five stages:

• Step 1 — Introductory call: A 30–60 minute call to assess whether there is genuine fit between the organisation's mandate, capital, and the ECAHLI partnership architecture. Book via Calendly or contact investment@ecahli.com directly.
• Step 2 — Lane alignment: A more detailed conversation confirming which engagement lane (Global Holdings seat, Node equity, DFI debt, strategic programme, PPP) is the right fit — and which geography and Node is the relevant entry point.
• Step 3 — NDA and data room: A mutual NDA is executed. Full financial models (Node-specific and/or HoldCo), capital stack documentation, SPV governance framework, Movement IV module detail, risk disclosures, and institutional correspondence are shared for review.
• Step 4 — MoU and term sheet: A non-binding MoU or term sheet captures the outline of the proposed arrangement — ticket size, role, governance rights, return structure, and key conditions — and establishes the basis for formal documentation.
• Step 5 — Formal documentation and approvals: Binding legal documentation — SPV agreements, seat agreements, service contracts, or PPP frameworks — are produced under applicable law. Independent legal review is expected and required. Formal approvals by both parties are completed before commitment.

No formal preparation is required for the first call — it is exploratory. But it helps significantly to have clarity on: your organisation's mandate and what it is optimising for (returns, impact, strategic positioning, pipeline development, or a combination); the geographies you are able and interested in engaging; your approximate capital capacity and time horizon; and whether Global Holdings or Node-level partnership (or both) is the more likely fit.

Partners who have reviewed the ECAHLI investor documentation — the Kisumu business plan, financial model overview, and governance framework summary — will have more productive initial conversations. These are available on request under NDA.

Timelines vary by partner type and engagement complexity. DFI credit committee processes typically run 3–6 months from initial engagement to conditional approval. Institutional equity and Global Holdings seat processes can run 6–16 weeks depending on due diligence scope. PPP and government engagement timelines are highly variable by jurisdiction and procurement framework.

ECAHLI does not encourage rushed processes. The 90-day pre-development sprint structure means there is a defined window for partner onboarding before full Node capital deployment commences — but the process should move at the pace that allows proper independent review by both parties.

No. ECAHLI is a complex, early-stage, multi-country platform operating in demanding development environments. It suits organisations with long-horizon mandates (7–25 years), genuine operational or strategic capacity to contribute at Node or platform level, and the appetite to work through multi-jurisdiction regulatory and legal complexity.

ECAHLI is probably not suitable for organisations requiring guaranteed short-term revenue, precise timeline certainty, or the ability to operate entirely independently without platform governance coordination. The honest assessment is that the organisations who thrive in this partnership are those who see community development as a serious, long-term institutional business — not a project to execute and exit.