GSImpact

$150 billion a year flows into entrepreneurship support.
Most funders can't tell you if it's working.

I help foundations and corporate philanthropies build measurement frameworks that are actually aligned with what they're trying to accomplish — and programs designed to match.

See how I work Get in touch
$350M Portfolio designed at JPMorgan Chase
$100M Philanthropic capital deployed
37 Countries with programs supported
$600M Illinois supplier diversity program led
EUI Fellow European University Institute
PhD Cand. ESCP Business School, Paris

The measurement problem is costing the field more than it knows.

The metrics that dominate entrepreneurship funding — jobs created, revenue growth, businesses started — were designed for institutional accountability, not impact measurement. They tell funders what happened. They don't tell them whether it worked.

This matters beyond incomplete reporting. When funders mandate metrics that don't reflect real impact, program staff design programming to satisfy those metrics. The measurement framework shapes what gets built — and what gets funded. A misaligned theory of change, left unexamined, doesn't just produce bad data. It produces bad programs.

The field has been aware of this problem for years. What it has lacked is a rigorous, evidence-based framework for what better looks like — and someone willing to say plainly that the current approach isn't good enough.

Read the research →
How I work

The same problem, two entry points.

I work with funders who set the terms of measurement, and support organizations who operate within them. Both need the same thing: clarity on what they're trying to accomplish and frameworks that actually reflect it.

For funders

Goal clarity & measurement architecture

Helping foundations and corporate philanthropies build theories of change and impact frameworks that are aligned with their actual goals.

For funders

Portfolio strategy & governance

Senior advisory for foundations designing or scaling global entrepreneurship grant portfolios.

For support organizations

Program design & measurement

Helping business support organizations build programs and measurement frameworks that reflect real impact — and make the case to funders who are paying attention.

See the full scope of my work →

"If you're a funder who suspects your theory of change wouldn't hold up to hard questions — let's talk."

Get in touch
About

I've sat on both sides of this problem.

As a funder. As a program designer. Now as a researcher. The measurement problem in entrepreneurship support isn't theoretical to me — I helped perpetuate it, and I've spent years working out why it persists and what it would take to fix it.

Cate Costa
Cate Costa — Founding Principal, GSImpact

For most of my career, I've worked at the intersection of entrepreneurship, philanthropy, and economic development — designing programs, deploying capital, and trying to understand what actually moves the needle for the entrepreneurs and communities these investments are meant to serve.

As Vice President of Global Philanthropy at JPMorgan Chase, I designed the firm's $350 million small business commitment — deploying nearly $100 million in philanthropic capital across 37 countries and supporting over 200,000 entrepreneurs per year. I built blended finance structures, modernized grant governance, co-created field-wide initiatives, and sat in the rooms where measurement decisions get made.

Before JPMorgan Chase, I led Illinois' $600 million supplier diversity program, where I managed a 19-person team across 65 state agencies and drove a 23% increase in contract value to diverse-owned businesses. Earlier in my career, I directed entrepreneurship programming at the Chicago Urban League, where I redesigned curriculum, turned a budget deficit into a surplus, and learned what it looks like when programming actually changes outcomes for participants.

What I observed across all of those roles — and what I'm now studying formally — is that the metrics the entrepreneurship support field uses to evaluate success are fundamentally misaligned with its stated goals. That misalignment isn't just a data problem. It shapes what programs get designed, what organizations get funded, and ultimately whether entrepreneurs are better off.

My doctoral research at ESCP Business School examines this misalignment directly: why it persists, whether funders recognize it, and what an evidence-based measurement framework for entrepreneurship support would actually look like. I'm a Visiting Fellow at the European University Institute and Vice Chair of the Board of Founders First Community Development Corporation.

Through GSImpact, I work with foundations, corporate philanthropies, and business support organizations to build measurement frameworks and program designs that are coherent, honest, and aligned with what they're actually trying to accomplish.

I work with decision-makers. I ask hard questions. And I don't confuse a well-written theory of change with one that actually holds together.

Education & recognition

Education

Global Executive PhD in Management (in progress)
ESCP Business School, Paris

Master of Business Administration
Howard University School of Business

Bachelor of Arts
Mount Holyoke College

Executive Education
Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth

Recognition & appointments

Visiting Fellow — European University Institute

Crain's Chicago 40 Under 40, 2021

Porsche Power 30 Under 30, 2017

Appointed: Illinois Business Enterprise Program Council

Appointed: Chicago Task Force on Removing Barriers to Employment and Entrepreneurship

Work with me
Services

The same problem,
two entry points.

Funders set the terms of measurement. Support organizations operate within them. Both need frameworks that actually reflect what they're trying to accomplish. I work with both — from opposite sides of the same table.

For foundations and corporate philanthropies

If you fund entrepreneurship programs, you've likely felt the friction: the metrics your grantees report don't quite tell you what you actually need to know. Your theory of change made sense when you wrote it, but it doesn't fully hold up when someone asks hard questions. You want to do more than report — you want to know if it's working.

That friction is structural, not accidental. I help funders resolve it.

Goal clarity diagnostic 3–4 weeks

The starting point. Before you can measure impact, you need a theory of change that actually holds together — one that makes an honest distinction between poverty alleviation and wealth building, connects your activities to your goals through a logical chain, and gives you the basis for an aligned measurement framework.

What this looks like: Senior stakeholder interviews, goal articulation workshop, first-draft theory of change, written brief with recommendations.

Measurement architecture 8–14 weeks
Core engagement

The core work. Starting from your theory of change, I audit your current metrics against your stated goals, identify where the misalignment is and what it's costing you, and design a new impact framework your organization can actually use — to learn, improve, and make better funding decisions.

What this looks like: Theory of change audit, current metrics analysis, goal-metric alignment assessment, new framework design, executive presentation and implementation roadmap.

Portfolio strategy advisory Retainer, 4-month minimum

For funders designing or scaling global entrepreneurship grant portfolios — expanding to new geographies, adding new funding instruments like blended finance or program-related investments, or restructuring a portfolio that has grown beyond its original logic.

What this looks like: Ongoing senior advisory — monthly strategy sessions, asynchronous review of portfolio decisions, governance design, grantee selection criteria, capital mix recommendations.

For business support organizations

The most effective support organizations I've encountered share one quality: they can tell you not just what they do, but why it works — and they have the data to back it up. That combination of program clarity and measurement integrity is also, not coincidentally, what serious funders are looking for.

I help BSOs build both.

Measurement clarity 4–6 weeks

You're collecting data. The question is whether it tells you anything useful — about where your programming is working, where it isn't, and what you'd need to change to improve outcomes for the entrepreneurs you serve.

What this looks like: Data and reporting review, goal-metric alignment assessment, recommendations for revised framework, funder communication guidance.

Theory of change & program design 6–10 weeks

Good programs start with a clear theory of change — a logical account of how your specific activities lead to the outcomes you're trying to produce for your specific population. I help you build or rebuild your program from the goal down.

What this looks like: Goal clarification sessions, theory of change development, program structure and curriculum design, implementation guidance.

I don't send proposals to people I haven't spoken with.

If one of these engagements sounds like what you need, the first step is a conversation.

Get in touch
Writing & research

The ongoing conversation.

I write about the measurement problem in entrepreneurship funding — why it exists, what it costs, and what better looks like. My doctoral research at ESCP Business School is the formal investigation. The writing below is the ongoing conversation.

Featured essay
Core argument

We Are Spending $150 Billion a Year on Entrepreneurship. We Can't Tell You if It's Working.

The metrics that dominate entrepreneurship funding were designed for institutional accountability, not impact measurement — and that distinction is costing the field more than it knows.

Read the essay →
Doctoral research

Metric misalignment in philanthropic support for entrepreneurship

My research at ESCP Business School examines why the metrics institutional funders use to evaluate entrepreneurship programs are so often disconnected from their stated goals — and whether this reflects a genuine belief that current metrics capture what matters, or simply a divergence over time between what institutions say they want and what they actually track.

The research moves across three connected inquiries: a conceptual analysis of whether dominant metric families are theoretically suited to the goals funders espouse; an empirical proxy-validity study assessing which metrics most accurately predict entrepreneurs' household financial health; and an investigation into why misaligned metric regimes persist.

Expected completion: 2029

All writing
Measurement

We All Know the Emperor is Naked: Why Are We Still Measuring the Clothes?

The entrepreneurship support field's most-used metrics don't measure what we claim to care about, and the people in the room largely know it.

Measurement

What the Small Business Space Should Learn from the Financial Literacy Reckoning

The personal finance field once measured success by what people knew rather than how they were doing — and eventually had the honesty to admit it wasn't working.

Measurement · Research

My Next Chapter: Why I'm Pursuing a PhD to Tackle Philanthropy's Tough Questions

On why closing the gap between what the field says it wants and what it actually tracks requires more than frustration — it requires evidence. Research has evolved since publication.

Grantmaking practice

3 Signs Your CSR is Performative, Not Impactful (And How to Fix It)

When a program's mechanics contradict its stated mission and success metrics mask a negative reality — these aren't edge cases, they're the norm.

Grantmaking practice

The Hidden Power of Pipeline Development: Why Waiting for Proposals Is Leaving Impact on the Table

A reactive grantmaking model doesn't just create inefficiency — it systematically favors the best-known organizations over the most effective ones.

Grantmaking practice

From Scrutiny to Strategy: How to Fight Paternalism in Your Due Diligence

Due diligence too often becomes an exercise in institutional authority rather than strategic alignment — and the organizations doing the most important work pay the highest price.

Grantmaking practice

Beyond the Tax Code: A Values Test for Corporate Philanthropy

If a shift in tax policy is enough to dismantle a company's giving program, the commitment was never really about values.

Contact

Let's talk.

If you're a funder who's frustrated that your metrics don't tell you what you actually need to know — or who suspects your theory of change wouldn't hold up to hard questions — I'd like to hear from you.

If you're a business support organization that wants to build programming and measurement that actually reflects your impact, same.

The first conversation is just a conversation. No proposal, no pitch deck. We'll figure out together whether there's a project worth doing.

Speaking inquiries

Available for keynotes, funder convenings, and peer-learning events focused on impact measurement, theory of change design, and the future of entrepreneurship funding. Use the form above to get in touch.