Picture the journey of a successful venture. Most of us have the image of an upward curve in mind – an idea that progresses into a successful business gradually. The reality? The true journey of an entrepreneur and their venture is far messier, full of unexpected twists and turns. Growth happens in waves – one step forward, two steps sideways, oftentimes even a step back.
At Building Bridges 2025, the tension between the dream versus reality of impact ventures took center stage. Fourfold Foundation, Julius Baer Foundation, elea, iGravity, and Enviu shared the panel “From Ideation to Investability: Building Early-Stage Impact Ventures that Attract Capital”. Together, we discussed what it truly takes to bring an idea to investability, which financial and entrepreneurial support is needed, what investability means and why the valley of death remains one of the hardest, yet most urgent, challenges in the impact sector.
Valerie Remoquillo-Jenni, CEO of Fourfold Foundation, explains: “Turning an idea into an investable venture is rarely a straight shot. Rather, it’s an ecosystem of intertwined processes. From system analysis and ideation, through validation and building, all the way to scaling, each stage requires a different kind of support – financial, entrepreneurial, and institutional.”
“Entrepreneurs don’t just need capital. They need the right kind of capital and entrepreneurial support, at the right time, from the right partners, shares Valerie.”
How these companies provide financial and entrepreneurial support. Source: Enviu
Financial support: grants as long as possible, or investment as soon as possible?
Multiple forms of capital are available for impact ventures. The question is how to deploy these effectively. So far, this has proven to be a big challenge. The “valley of death” is still very much alive; the stage in which a venture has proven its idea but hasn’t scaled. At some point, a venture is perceived as being too commercial for philanthropy but not commercial enough for investment.
That leads to the question: what type of capital builds the most successful impact ventures: grants as long as possible, or investments as soon as possible?
Laura Hemrika, CEO of Julius Baer Foundation:
“Grants are pivotal. It takes time to turn a vision and idea into a venture. Grants help to maintain control over the mission and organization.”
Dieuwertje Nelissen, Executive Director of Enviu, adds: “Grants are the most patient capital out there. They allow us to develop ventures that are truly impactful and have a solid business model.”
However, while these two perspectives certainly hold weight, there’s also another viewpoint to consider.
Amanda Turner Ege, Executive Director of elea, shares their perspective as an equity investor:
“Getting to investments quickly, incentivizes ventures to build a solid business case from the start and strive to reach profitability as soon as possible.”
Patrick Elmer, CEO of iGravity, echoes this:
“Going out there and selling your idea to investors keeps you focused and disciplined. A mission-aligned and patient investor is very valuable.”
Each type of capital comes with its own upsides and downsides and serves a purpose. It’s widely agreed that a mix of capital is the best way to realize a successful impact venture. Various types of capital can be deployed at different moments, and reoccur. For example, grants may come first, followed by impact investment through debt or equity, and then grants again in combination with technical assistance.
So, what is needed to bridge the valley of death and to deploy the right capital in the right moment?
Above all, more patient capital needs to be allocated to supporting early-stage impact entrepreneurs, regardless of the type of instrument. Moreover, coordination and collaboration in the ecosystem can make a difference.
“What we lack,” Laura observed, “is clarity on who funds what, when, and why.”
The early-stage ecosystem often functions in silos – philanthropies, investors, and support organizations – each operating in parallel rather than in sync. If the systems moved together, fewer promising ventures would get stranded between stages.
Examples of effective collaboration already exist. For example, Amanda explains: “At elea we actively connect our ventures to other capital providers, as we believe this is part of our role as an active impact investor. We aim to do more of this and to connect each venture to several capital providers in every funding round.”
However, true collaboration between capital providers remains limited. One big opportunity is in teaming up earlier. Impact investors could analyze a venture at an early stage and make clear what is needed for it to be “investment ready”, with the aim to step in, in a coordinated approach.
Grants could also be deployed in an innovative way. “We have experienced that mechanisms like convertible and repayable grants can bridge grants and investments,” Dieuwertje shares.
Even if the right capital is available at the right time, the impact ventures should also be ready for it. This is the question of investability.
What does investability actually entail?
The term investment readiness is used to indicate whether or not a start-up is ready to receive an equity investment. It is used for measuring the (perceived) risk and return of the investment and is comprised of some key aspects:
- Team: strong management who can bring the venture to the next level
- Desirability: clear target market, proven customer demand, traction
- Feasibility: proof of concept
- Viability: unit economics, viable financial model, path to profitability and growth
- Impact: proven environmental and/or social impact
While all these criteria are known, investment in early-stage impact ventures will always come with a high risk so patient capital is needed.
According to Dieuwertje, “Each venture will score higher on some points than others, so in the end it boils down to an aligned vision between the investor and the entrepreneurial team on the model and its impact, and a clear path and the right team to realize this.”
She continues: “Enviu’s venture SokoFresh is a great example of this. The first investors stepped in when there was proof of concept and unit economics, but not everything was proven yet. The investors believed in the vision and in the team, which was crucial to get involved.”
Enviu’s venture SokoFresh (pictured: Denis Karema, CEO)
“A great leader knows when to push and when to ask for help. The best entrepreneurs are both stubborn enough to persevere and modest enough to know when they need support,” says Amanda.
Patrick adds, “The ability to execute and the resilience of the entrepreneur are important factors. Moreover, the ability of the entrepreneur to generate revenue in different ways is an asset.”
“A strong entrepreneurial team will be able to balance between purpose and profit”, Dieuwertje concludes. Both are crucial in attracting the right capital at the right moment, and to reach impact in a viable manner at scale.
In the end, investability comes down to more than metrics. It is about the right mix of vision, team, proof of metrics, and trust between entrepreneurs and investors to take a promising idea to scale.
Bridging efforts to build what’s next
Will it ever be an easy journey? Most likely not. To move ventures beyond the valley of death, from idea to investment, from mission to market, we need to bridge efforts, aligning expertise and purpose. Only then can we create ventures that are not just investable but truly transformative.
Let’s not wait at the end of the pipeline, let’s create it!
