Sometimes I wonder exactly how much financial engineering a "non profit" entity is supposed to need...

You have it backwards. The non profit is part of the financial engineering, not the other way around.

It simply means he didn't put his own money into the fund.

Might it therefore imply that he seeks to put others but not his own money into the fund?

Or does it imply that he has no intention of profiting from the fund?

why is it so outlandish that it could be the latter?

It could mean there were other agreements, where he didn't put any money into the fund and all profits were contractually obligated elsewhere?