How to define an investment mandate for Ukrainian energy projects
Build a Ukrainian energy investment brief with stage, technology, control, evidence thresholds, acquisition budget, completion capital and exclusions.
Jurisdiction: Ukraine. Sources reviewed . Evergreen framework. Next scheduled editorial review: . Material rule changes require earlier review.
A useful investment mandate can reject an unsuitable opportunity and identify the evidence needed for a suitable one. “Renewables in Ukraine” is a sector interest; it does not tell a seller what your team can acquire, fund or operate.
Define the transaction perimeter, acceptable development risk, control rights and total capital available before comparing projects. Tillerstone uses those criteria to frame private project discussions; sharing a brief does not itself commission an active sourcing assignment.
Start with capital allocation
Separate the acquisition payment from equity injected into the SPV, debt repayment, connection and construction spending, transaction costs and working capital. A €10 million total budget is different from €10 million available solely for the seller. These are hypothetical amounts, not market benchmarks.
Define currency and timing. If capital is released in stages, specify the evidence required at each stage and who funds overruns. An acquisition mandate should also explain whether shareholder loans are acquired, repaid or left outstanding, subject to agreed terms.
A one-page mandate framework
Table — scroll horizontally if needed
| Field | Decision to write down | Example of a precise condition |
|---|---|---|
| Technology | Solar, wind, BESS, gas, hybrid; permitted combinations | BESS must have separately evidenced import and export |
| Stage | Operating, RTB or specified development milestones | We can fund unfinished external grid works, within a stated budget |
| Capacity | Comparable MW/MWh definitions and ranges | Solar export MW and MWp DC reported separately |
| Geography | Broad regions and risk exclusions | No exact sensitive coordinates in the first outline |
| Structure | Full ownership, minority, JV, capital injection or debt | Minority participation requires defined budget and funding decisions |
| Funding | Acquisition budget, completion capital and reserve | Total commitment includes construction contingency |
| Revenue | Acceptable contracted/merchant exposure and evidence | Historical revenue must reconcile to settlements and cash |
| Readiness | Minimum documents and acceptable open issues | Current connection package must identify external dependencies |
| Timeline | Decision authority, review capacity and funding date | Indicative offer after a defined initial information set |
| Exclusions | Conditions that stop review | Unexplained ownership or contradictory capacity records |
These examples illustrate a brief, not recommended investment criteria. The right conditions depend on your organisation’s capability and risk appetite.
Use three levels of conditions
Mark each requirement as mandatory, preferred or open to discussion. A missing field is unknown; it is not automatically a match. Record who may waive a preference and who approves a change to mandatory criteria.
For example, a team with construction capability might accept remaining grid work but require documented land access. Another team may require an operating asset and confirmed collections. Both briefs can be coherent; they lead to different opportunities and prices.
Separate screening qualification from RTB and full diligence. A Project Passport can support comparisons without making every fact confirmed. Ask for evidence states per material claim and retain unresolved items in the decision record.
Set the disclosure and decision process
Identify the authorised investment team, adviser roles, confidentiality scope and person who may issue an indicative offer. Define the initial information set, NDA stage, diligence budget and internal approval gates. Avoid sharing a private investor mandate beyond its approved recipients.
Request dated availability confirmation before deeper review. A listed project may require reconfirmation; an announced developer pipeline is not transaction-ready inventory. If a requirement changes, issue a revised brief so a shortlist does not continue to use obsolete criteria.
Turn the brief into a working comparison
Use the same evidence sheet for every candidate: fit, mismatch, unknown, source date and next action. Do not reduce the decision to a score that hides an unresolved ownership, grid or funding dependency. Track total capital at risk before first cash and the capacity of your team to execute the transaction.
Read the screening framework and acquisition process. Discuss your mandate, sharing an approved non-confidential outline.