Natasha started on the ground at an after-school community centre in Bangalore, managing volunteers, stretching budgets and ending up in the classroom herself when the programme needed an extra pair of hands. That is where the questions began: not just whether programmes worked, but why the evidence made to prove it rarely matched what people inside them already knew.

The instinct to find the structural answer, not the surface one, has shaped a decade of work: MEL design across thirty Indian cities, evaluation for a global youth mental health fund spanning twelve countries and most recently the assessment behind a £2m continuation funding decision across 21 VCSE organisations in South London. She holds an engineering degree and an MA in Design Management from the University of the Arts London, where research sharpened one specific question about who designs evidence systems and what assumptions get built in.

Nuvora Impact is built on a specific conviction: evaluation only holds when it begins by mapping the system a programme sits inside (what reinforces its outcomes, what constrains them, what the programme cannot change alone) before deciding what to measure. The result is evidence that shows where to intervene, not just what to report.

She is an individual contributor for the Design for Good global alliance, a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, a Fellow of the Design Research Society and an UN Women UK volunteer. Ten years in, the question that first drove her into this work is still the one she asks every day: Who gets to decide what counts as evidence? That question is now the founding logic of Nuvora Impact.