Why Doesn't Capital Intent Become Deployment? Nathaniel Heller on the Conditions That Decide What Gets Funded | RootsToFoods Capital Series

RootsToFoods Capital Series · Wave 1, Episode 1 · Capital Insight Brief

Why Doesn't Capital Intent Become Deployment? Nathaniel Heller on the Conditions That Decide What Gets Funded

The capital deployment gap is a conditions problem, not a supply problem, according to Nathaniel Heller, executive vice president of Geneva Global and Global Impact Ventures. Enough philanthropic and impact capital exists. What is missing is trust infrastructure, strong organizations doing the work on the ground, and donors willing to treat missed impact, rather than regulatory compliance, as the risk that matters.

Guest: Nathaniel Heller, Executive Vice President, Geneva Global and Global Impact Ventures

Host: Ovidiu Bujorean, Chief Executive Officer, OviBees Ventures

Series: RootsToFoods Capital Series, produced by OviBees Ventures with AV Ventures (an ACDI/VOCA affiliate) as founding partner and AllAfrica Global Media as media partner

Episode: Wave 1, Episode 1: "Capital Deployment in Practice: What Gets Funded and Why"

Published: May 5, 2026

Key takeaways

Nathaniel Heller, executive vice president of Geneva Global and Global Impact Ventures, argues that the capital deployment gap comes from missing conditions, not missing capital.
In Heller's view, risk in philanthropy should mean the risk of not achieving impact with limited dollars, not the risk of wiring money to bad people.
Official development assistance has fallen by 23% overall, according to OECD data for 2024.
After 15 years of private donor backing, the Ethiopian government now covers 90% of the cost of the Speed School program.
Speed School has returned more than 1 million children to school across two East African countries.
According to Geneva Global field data, 80% of outcomes improve when capital flows through trusted local actors.
Donor collaboratives work when governance is agreed before capital moves. Seeing peers commit can move a single funder from a $5 million to a $10 million commitment.

"Risk in philanthropy should not be about the risk of wiring money to bad people. Risk should be about the risk of not achieving impact with limited philanthropic dollars. If we start to be anxious about that kind of risk, it can motivate very positive behavioral change."

Nathaniel Heller, Executive Vice President, Geneva Global and Global Impact Ventures, RootsToFoods Capital Series, Episode 1

What unlocks capital: three conditions

Heller names three conditions that have to be in place before capital moves. The first is trust in the people doing the work, built through reputation and relationships rather than paperwork or databases. The second is compelling evidence of impact: stories anchored in data, not data alone. The third is alignment between the donor's strategy and the organization's strengths, or, in Heller's words, "singing from the same sheet of music."

How donor collaboratives work

Donors take bigger risks together than they do alone. When a funder sees peers commit, it can stretch beyond its solo appetite, moving from a $5 million to a $10 million commitment in a single decision. Grantees benefit too: one block grant replaces ten separate donor relationships, which cuts transaction costs and leaves more time for implementation. Collaboratives break down when governance and decision-making are not written down at the start, because donors used to doing things their own way resist being told no. Heller's prescription is to design the rules of the game before any capital moves: veto rights, how disagreements get resolved, and how minority opinions are handled. With that playbook in place, the group has something to return to when donors are at loggerheads.

What is working

Patient capital that builds government ownership

Capital with a 10 to 20 year horizon can hand a program over to the state. Speed School in Ethiopia is now 90% funded by the government after 15 years of private donor backing.

Cost-effectiveness philanthropy

Approaches such as deworming and GiveWell-style giving generate measurable social return on investment at scale.

Donor collaboratives with governance agreed upfront

When the rules are settled first, peer pressure unlocks larger and bolder commitments.

Intermediaries building cross-border legal infrastructure

Some intermediaries are building the legal routes that let capital move around geopolitical friction.

What is not working

Donor hubris

Funders engineer solutions without domain expertise and treat grantees as implementing contractors.

Compliance over efficacy

Due diligence focuses on regulatory compliance and skips the harder question: what is the organization actually achieving?

Matchmaking platforms built on the wrong assumption

Platforms assume donors maximize social return. In practice, emotional and relational factors dominate how donors give.

Business-as-usual grant-making

Grants keep flowing to mediocre organizations without anyone questioning their theory of change.

Frequently asked questions

Why doesn't philanthropic and impact capital reach the opportunities that need it?

According to Nathaniel Heller, executive vice president of Geneva Global and Global Impact Ventures, speaking on the RootsToFoods Capital Series, the problem is not a shortage of capital. Sufficient philanthropic and impact capital exists. What is missing is trust infrastructure, strong organizations on the ground, and donors willing to measure risk as missed impact rather than as regulatory compliance.

How should philanthropists think about risk?

Heller argues that risk in philanthropy should not be about the risk of wiring money to bad people. It should be about the risk of not achieving impact with limited philanthropic dollars. If donors start to worry about that kind of risk, he says, it can motivate very positive behavioral change.

What three conditions unlock philanthropic capital?

Heller identifies three: trust in the people doing the work, built on reputation and relationships rather than paperwork; compelling evidence of impact, meaning stories anchored in data rather than data alone; and alignment between the donor's strategy and the organization's strengths.

When do donor collaboratives work, and when do they fail?

Donor collaboratives work when governance is agreed at the start: decision rules, veto rights and protocols for disagreement are written down before capital moves. They fail when those rules are left open, because donors used to acting alone resist being told no. Done well, a collaborative lets donors take bigger risks together and gives grantees one block grant instead of ten separate relationships.

What does the Speed School program show about patient capital?

Speed School shows what a 10 to 20 year horizon can achieve. After 15 years of private donor backing, the Ethiopian government now covers 90% of the program's costs, and the program has returned more than 1 million children to school across two East African countries.

Data points

Figure	What it means	Source
23%	Overall decline in official development assistance.	OECD, 2024
90%	Share of Speed School costs now covered by the Ethiopian government after 15 years of private donor backing.	Geneva Global and Speed School, cited Episode 1
1M+	Children returned to school across two East African countries.	Speed School program, cited Episode 1
80%	Share of outcomes that improve when capital flows through trusted local actors.	Geneva Global field data, cited Episode 1
$5M to $10M	How far a single funder can stretch its commitment after seeing peers commit in a donor collaborative.	Nathaniel Heller, RootsToFoods Capital Series, Episode 1
10 to 20 years	Time horizon of patient capital that builds government ownership of a program.	Nathaniel Heller, Episode 1

Practical implications for capital allocators

For a family office, foundation or institutional investor asking why its capital is not reaching high-impact opportunities, Heller's advice is to start by auditing the due diligence process. The question is not "are we compliant?" It is "can we show we are funding organizations that are genuinely better than the alternatives?" Changing that one question changes everything downstream.

About the practitioner and the host

Nathaniel Heller is executive vice president of Geneva Global and Global Impact Ventures. LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/nathanielheller

Ovidiu Bujorean works at the intersection of capital deployment, entrepreneurship ecosystem building and global venture acceleration. Chief executive of OviBees Ventures and designer and host of the RootsToFoods Capital Series, he brings more than 25 years of experience in impact investing, blended finance and cross-sectoral partnerships to globalizing promising early-stage companies. As architect and senior manager of the U.S. Department of State's Global Innovation through Science and Technology (GIST) Initiative under the Obama Administration, he built a global advisory council and mentor network spanning 50 entrepreneurship organizations across Africa, the Middle East, Turkey and Southeast Asia. He serves on the boards and advisory councils of the Corporate Council on Africa, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, ANDE and Convergence, and his work has been featured in Forbes, CNBC Africa, Al Jazeera and AllAfrica, among other outlets worldwide. Fluent in English and French, he holds a master's in public administration from Harvard Kennedy School and an MBA from MIT, and was selected for Marquis Who's Who in America in 2024. LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/bujorean

Related episodes

Series Partners

Founding Partner

Media Partner