Purpose: Determine whether your initiative is mature enough to engage investors and where improvements are needed.

Tool: Readiness assessment

What it covers:

• Governance and organisational structure
• Nature of the preventive intervention
• Finance model maturity
• Scalability potential
• Strength and capacity of the team

Action: Conduct a structured self-assessment to identify your overall readiness level, maturity stage, and priority gaps. Use the results to decide where capacity-building would strengthen your position. It is worth noting, however, full "investment readiness" is not a prerequisite for engaging investors or other stakeholders, early-stage conversations can be valuable in their own right, helping to shape the model, test assumptions, and build relationships before a formal pitch.

Purpose: Building on the stakeholder mapping (see Stage 3) and incentive analysis (see Stage 4), identify which actors could contribute financial or non-financial investment to support the initiative. At this stage, the stakeholder map becomes an investment ecosystem map, helping clarify who finances, delivers, benefits from, and governs the intervention.

What this covers:

• Commissioners or outcome payers
• Actors of service delivery (including non-financial contributors (data providers, infrastructure partners, intermediaries, regulators)
• Target populations
• Financial investors (public, philanthropic, or private)

Action: Map existing flows of money, services, and data. Use the visualisation to identify leverage points, misalignments, and opportunities for attracting investment or reallocating existing resources. A simple way to structure this is to clarify for each actor: their role (payer, provider, beneficiary), their contribution (financial or non-financial), and their expected return.

To complement the illustrative examples provided in the table below, practitioners are encouraged to explore resources such as the Government Outcomes Lab organisation directory. This resource, including its Outcomes Fund Directory and investor classification, help identify and compare potential financing actors across sectors and geographies.

Table 1. Illustration of real-world financing actors supporting health promotion and disease prevention projects in different countries.

Purpose: Translate the incentive analysis developed in Stage 4 into a clear value proposition for each stakeholder and potential investor. Clarify what “success” looks like for different actors and build a credible, evidence-based value proposition.

Tool: Stakeholder Value Matrix

What this covers:

• Financial and investment value
• Organisational and operational benefits
• Health gain and equity outcomes
• System-level benefits (health system efficiency, environmental or social impacts)

Value matrix example:

Action: For each stakeholder, specify which value dimensions matter most to them, how your initiative delivers that value, and what level of evidence supports that claim. Identify evidence gaps that must be addressed before approaching investors. Prioritise a small number of value propositions that are most relevant for each stakeholder, rather than attempting to demonstrate all possible benefits. Ensure that outcomes and metrics are supported by a feasible monitoring and evaluation framework (see Stage 6).

Purpose: Communicate your idea as an attractive, investable proposition.

Tools you could use:

• Outputs from all previous steps
• Example pitch from Invest4Health project

The 7-minute pitch template

Use 3–5 sentences per section — keep it short, clear, and persuasive. Funders and policymakers respond to stories (emotional appeal), returns, and impact.

An AI generated example of what a good pitch looks like:

Topic: Investing in early childhood wellbeing

The problem: Across Europe, children in low-income families are twice as likely to experience obesity and mental health challenge by age 12 (WHO Europe, 2023)

The solution: We propose Healthy Start, a cross-sector partnership linking childcare centres, public health services, and local businesses to improve nutrition, movement, and mental wellbeing in early childhood. The approach builds on WHO and EU best practices for integrated early years investment.

The impact: For every 1€ invested in early health promotion, societies save 6€ in future healthcare and social costs (OECD, 2021). Beyond numbers, this investment nurtures healthier, more resilient communities — reducing long-term inequalities and boosting workforce participation.

The ask: We invite regional authorities and investors to contribute 1.5 million € in catalytic funding (public and social investment) to expand the programme to 10 municipalities, supported by outcome-based evaluation.

Action: Use toolkit outputs to develop a clear investment narrative: problem, solution, value creation, risk-sharing, governance, and ethics. Tailor messaging to different investor types while maintaining coherence and transparency. Ensure that assumptions, risks, and uncertainties are communicated transparently to build credibility with investors.

Purpose: Translate your understanding of financing options into a concrete, detailed, and communicable investment model, one that is grounded in your specific context, stakeholders, and value proposition.

Tools:

• SCI Flowchart – to guide selection among existing SCI-compatible investment models that can serve as archetypes
• SCI Taxonomy – to describe and design your model in detail across key dimensions (scope, partnerships, contracts, outcomes, risk, feasibility, and scalability)

What this covers:

• A structured comparison of available investment model archetypes, including their conditions, advantages, and limitations
• Selection of the most suitable model for your context
• Detailed design of your model across scope, partnership structure, investment contract, outcomes, risk profile, feasibility, and scalability

Action: Begin by using the SCI Flowchart to explore which existing models could serve as archetypes for your initiative. Based on the interests and motivations of investors identified in Step 3, develop two to three scenarios and assess their relative fit, considering the conditions, advantages, and limitations of each. Note that more complex models such as outcome-based financing or Social Impact Bonds may not always be necessary or feasible within available time and resources; simpler approaches can be equally effective depending on context.

Once a preferred model is identified, use the SCI Taxonomy to design it in detail:

• Dimension 1 – Technical scope of your project
• Dimension 2 – Main stakeholders and partnership structure
• Dimension 3 – Main lines of the investment contract, drawing on your chosen archetype while adapting where needed
• Dimensions 4 & 5 – Outcomes, metrics, and risk profile. Note that higher investor risk — for example through outcome-linked returns or equity investment — typically demands higher returns
• Dimensions 6 & 7 – Feasibility and scalability, linking back to the readiness assessment in Step 1

Each project's context is unique, so archetypes are starting points, not blueprints. The taxonomy is the tool for turning a general model into your specific, investable proposal.

Illustrative AI generated example

Blended finance model for a community food access and nutrition programme (Brussels, Belgium)

Dimension 1: Scope of the SCI

Dimension 2: Partnership

Dimension 3: Investment contract

Dimension 4: Outcomes

Dimension 5: Risk profile

Dimension 6: Feasibility

Dimension 7: Scalability

The Brabant Outcomes Fund (BOF) brings together the provincial government, social entrepreneurs, and private investors to co-finance projects that improve social inclusion, employment, and sustainability. Importantly, investors were not brought in at the end as funders of a pre-designed model, they were engaged from the outset, participating alongside payers and providers in shaping the fund's structure, outcome targets, and governance arrangements. The BOF demonstrates that cross-sector partnerships capable of mobilising capital for preventive, equity-focused initiatives are rarely designed in isolation — they are negotiated through real conversations, tested assumptions, and gradual commitment from all sides.

National Institute of Health in Italy is scaling up Music and Motherhood, a social prescribing programme offering group singing classes to young mothers experiencing post-partum depression. Following a successful pilot, which demonstrated high participation, inclusiveness across socio-cultural backgrounds, and significant reductions in depressive symptoms, ISS is implementing the intervention in six additional sites across Italy.

The programme is delivered through partnerships between local health services, musical institutions, and cultural organisations. Mothers are referred by healthcare professionals to community-based music sessions co-led by a trained singing facilitator and a health professional, ensuring both artistic quality and clinical safety. The intervention aims to de-medicalise care, strengthen mother–infant bonding, and improve social connectedness, while reducing pressure on primary and secondary healthcare services.

To ensure long-term sustainability, two financing approaches are being explored. The first combines traditional public health funding with partial philanthropic support, particularly from regional bank foundations, to cover set-up and ongoing delivery costs without commercial user fees. The second considers an outcome-based financing model, such as a Social Impact Bond, where upfront investment is provided by social investors and reimbursed by public commissioners if agreed health and engagement outcomes are achieved.