How to Partner
with ECAHLI.

ECAHLI Global Holdings is the permanent Dutch Stichting platform steward. It owns: (1) the intellectual property — the node design framework, governance architecture, PSC-G model, and replication methodology; (2) the institutional relationships with governments, DFIs, and strategic partners across continents; and (3) the governance authority over every Node's strategic direction and capital deployment.

Every individual Node operates under licence from Global Holdings and coordination with its governance. The stewardship fee (USD 1.506M per node) and the HQ waterfall share from each Node's operating cash flow are the primary economic flows into the holding structure. This creates a compounding business model: as more Nodes are deployed, the Global Holdings economic base scales non-linearly.

The Founder (Petrus Van Der Merwe) holds the Lifelong Chair. No seat holder, individually or collectively, can dissolve or reorient the platform from its 50-year mission. This is intentional.

Global Holdings seat holders participate through: (1) Investment Committee membership and attendance on Board decisions regarding major platform changes; (2) supermajority threshold protection on material strategic decisions — no single party, including the Founder, can unilaterally alter the node pipeline or capital structure; (3) pipeline co-design participation — genuine input into which geographies are prioritised and in what sequence; (4) information rights — quarterly or defined-interval access to platform financials, node performance metrics, and institutional developments; and (5) strategic input into the composition of co-investors at node level.

Specific voting thresholds, veto provisions, and approval rights are defined in the formal governance documentation. The Founder retains executive authority and day-to-day operational control. The Board and IC hold oversight authority on material platform changes.

Global Holdings seat capital commitments vary by partner profile and are negotiated individually. Typical holding-level commitments range from USD 10–50M, deployed across multiple nodes over a 5–7 year period. However, there is no formulaic standard — commitments are structured around the partner's mandate and capital availability.

The capital commitment is distinct from node-level investment. A seat holder may also deploy capital at individual Node level (equity, DFI debt, or strategic envelopes) — these are separate, legally distinct arrangements with different governance and economic rights.

Global Holdings economics are derived from: (1) the development stewardship fee (USD 1.506M per node, paid in milestone-linked tranches over the development phase); and (2) the HQ waterfall share from each Node's operating cash flow (percentage defined in governance documentation, varies by seat holder). At full 50-node pipeline across continents, the holding-level economics become material. However, early-stage returns depend on deployment sequencing and actual execution.

All returns are modelled projections. Global Holdings partners should engage independent financial and legal advisors to model returns against their capital deployment timeline and hurdle rate expectations.

Global Holdings seats are designed for organisations with:

• Long-horizon mandates — 10–25 year investment horizons, not project cycles
• Institutional credibility — relationships with DFIs, governments, and the development finance market
• Capital capacity — ability to commit USD 10M+ at platform level over multiple deployment phases
• Governance appetite — genuine interest in co-stewardship, not passive capital placement
• Mission alignment — belief that integrated regenerative community development is fundamental, not supplementary
• Geographic reach — relationships or operational capacity in Africa, Latin America, or Asia

Likely candidates: major impact-aligned family offices, sovereign wealth funds with ESG mandates, development foundations, DFIs considering platform-level engagement, and multinational corporates with sustainable community development mandates.

The 3 filled seats have demonstrated that serious institutional engagement at platform level is achievable and that aligned partners can contribute meaningfully to governance and development of the network. These seats bring distinct institutional profiles — geographic expertise, DFI relationships, capital capacity, and operational capability — each complementary to the others.

The 4 remaining seats are specifically designed to be complementary, not replicate the filled seats. ECAHLI is looking for partners who fill gaps in the platform's institutional footprint. A partner considering a seat should understand that the seat's value is in the composition of the full board — governance is stronger with diverse institutional perspectives, and the platform's reach is broader.

Each ECAHLI Node is developed within a dedicated local SPV — a registered operating entity in the relevant jurisdiction (Kenya SPV for Kisumu, Brazil SPV for Goiás, etc.). The SPV has its own board, Investment Committee, CEO, governance documentation, and capital stack. Partners commit capital to the SPV, not to Global Holdings. The SPV is where operations are governed, where returns are generated, and where partners have governance rights.

ECAHLI Global Holdings participates in each SPV through governance coordination and stewardship authority — but does not operate the Node. This structure means node-level partners are engaging a locally regulated, jurisdiction-specific legal entity. Independent legal review for your jurisdiction is essential before any commitment.

The Kisumu SPV is currently the primary node-level entry point for new capital partners. AfDB and KCB conversations are underway for the DFI capital tranche. Private equity and strategic partner enquiries are welcome.

Indicative Kisumu envelopes (not standard for all Nodes) include:

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

Yes. A partner might hold a Global Holdings seat — providing platform governance visibility and HoldCo economics — while also participating in one or more Node SPVs through equity, DFI debt, or strategic partnership. These are separate legal arrangements with distinct governance and economic rights.

This dual-level structure can be powerful: holding-level strategic perspective combined with direct operational and financial exposure in specific Nodes. A DFI with an Africa mandate might have a holding seat while also co-investing in Kisumu. A corporate with specific technical expertise might have a holding seat while anchoring a particular Node zone. The structure allows for both platform-level thinking and geographic-specific depth.

The Kisumi v29 base case produces the following modelled equity return profile for T1 equity partners:

Each ECAHLI Node is designed to be a complete community platform with verified outcomes. The Kisumu base case illustrates indicative per-Node impact:

• 450 homes per Node — 250 community homes + 200 affordable housing units
• 1,975-job employment ecosystem (direct + indirect + SME/farming supply chain)
• 395 permanent direct jobs at above-minimum-wage formal contracts
• 15,000 patients/year served by on-Node integrated healthcare
• 200 TVET students/year trained for roles inside the Node
• 25,000 tCO₂e/year removed or avoided — MRV-verified, ITMO-eligible
• 480 tonnes plastic diverted/year; 143 tonnes organics composted

For partners carrying DFI mandates, SDG commitments, or ESG targets — these outcomes are not supplementary initiatives. They are structural features of the Node's design. Commercial performance and impact outcomes are designed to reinforce each other, not compete.

Beyond financial economics, Global Holdings partners receive:

• Pipeline visibility: early access to Node development opportunities before they become public — enabling advance positioning in priority geographies
• Platform co-design: meaningful input into which geographies come next and how the replication architecture evolves
• Institutional positioning: association with an award-winning, first-of-its-kind community development platform with growing DFI and government relationships
• IP and data access: proprietary frameworks, MRV data infrastructure, and institutional knowledge base across the network
• Impact reporting credentials: verifiable Node-level data for ESG, SDG, and impact reporting obligations
• Replication leverage: as Nodes scale, your commitment multiplies in value across each new deployment

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 construction, operational, and financial milestones, not on a time basis
• Movement IV modules activation requires separate IC resolution — no optional module is activated without explicit partner 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 in the capital stack means external institutional accountability — DFIs do not co-invest without independent credit and governance review
• All governance rights — voting, information, consent, and approval thresholds — are defined in formal binding documentation

Protections are only as strong as their legal documentation. Independent legal review of the SPV governance framework by a qualified local attorney is essential before any capital commitment.

Movement IV is the governed upside expansion platform: 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.

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

For partners, Movement IV demonstrates that the governance architecture prioritizes base-case investor protection — governed upside, not inflated return assumptions. Your base returns are defensible. Upside is structured, not assumed.

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 sustainable community development economics viable at a responsible risk level.

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

ECAHLI actively seeks PPP engagement with governments and public bodies. Each Node delivers significant public goods — employment, housing, healthcare, food security, education, climate outcomes — that align naturally with government mandates and development plans.

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

The formal partnership engagement process has five stages:

• Step 1 — Introductory call (30–60 minutes): Assessment of fit between your mandate, capital, and the ECAHLI partnership architecture. This is exploratory, not a pitch. Book via Calendly or contact investment@ecahli.com.
• Step 2 — Lane alignment (60–90 minutes): Detailed conversation confirming which engagement lane (Global Holdings seat, Node equity, DFI debt, strategic programme, PPP) is right for you — and which geography and Node is the relevant entry point.
• Step 3 — NDA and data room: Mutual NDA is executed. Full financial models (Node-specific and HoldCo), capital stack documentation, SPV governance framework, Movement IV detail, risk disclosures, and institutional correspondence are shared for independent review.
• Step 4 — MoU and term sheet: 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.

Timelines vary by partner type. 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.

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 governance 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: the organisations that thrive in ECAHLI partnership see community development as a serious, long-term institutional commitment — not a project to execute and exit.