Blogroll
Lessons from Jonathan Greenblatt at the NYU Social Innovation Symposium
The 2nd Annual NYU Social Innovation Symposium was held on Friday, February 10th at the NYU’s Stern School of Business. Hundreds of students and practitioners from the public, private, and nonprofit sectors convened for case studies and panel discussions about social innovation and social entrepreneurship. It made for a day of enriching candid discussion, and an atmosphere of anticipation to hear the keynote speaker, Jonathan Greenblatt, interviewed by Spencer Ante, Deputy Bureau Chief of The Wall Street Journal.
Peter Henry, Dean of NYU's Stern School of Business, remarked in his introduction that social entrepreneurs work with a broad canvas. They source opportunities to create value for businesses and society, which is something Jonathan Greenblatt has done throughout his career. Now a Special Advisor to President Obama and Director of the Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation at the White House, Greenblatt has worked within both nonprofit and for-profit sectors. In the latter regard, Greenblatt was actually representative of many of the speakers and attendees at the symposium, which made his interview a very appropriate conclusion to the day.
The audience were mostly students of NYU's schools of law, business, and management. Towards the beginning of the interview, Greenblatt asked a question of the audience which received was a fascinating collective response: "How many of you think the sole purpose of business is to drive shareholder value?" There was silence and not a single hand was raised. Greenblatt went on to say that this demonstrates "something is afoot...the game is changing." Two main themes emerged through Greenblatt’s interview: his advice for social entrepreneurs, and the new and interesting activities of the Office.
Greenblatt frequently drew from his wide range of experiences, giving detail about his early career as well as his current job in the White House. He was quite candid about how far social entrepreneurship and social innovation has come. He recalled being met with blank stares and laughter in early days when he would explain that part of his business plan was to give away half their profit. He added that all kinds of entrepreneurs experience "rejection more than affirmation", and yet maintained it is probably more difficult to be a social entrepreneur than a regular business entrepreneur. There are simply more challenges associated with social entrepreneurship, like more complex stakeholder relations. What can social entrepreneurs do to improve? Greenblatt recommends social entrepreneurs focus on cultivating skills, which takes time and experience, and, most important in Greenblatt’s opinion, develop a good team.
It has helped, Greenblatt said, that Warren Buffet and Bill Gates have been evangelizing this kind of work. There is a whole new class of investors who are more aware about creating value that generates social return. An audience member asked how start-ups can compete with larger organizations in the sector, particularly when vying for investment. In response, Greenblatt asked of himself "what can we do to create an enabling environment for impact investing?"
One way is to standardize impact reporting, he said, because investors are more likely to care about impact than intent. New certifications, like B Corp, can help with advancing measurements. Greeblatt pointed out that B Corp is influencing many states, to the extent that there is a critical mass gathering among states to adopt new categories for business. He cited examples of companies whose corporate social responsibility efforts he finds especially impressive, including: GE, PepsiCo, Starbucks (where he was once partner, he admitted), KIND Healthy Snacks, Peeled Snacks, and Meetup. The "most remarkable" example, though, is WholeFoods, whose "values-driven value chain" is "changing the entire retail market."
Change is not only happening with larger companies, it is also evident with start-ups. "I think there is a sea change", Greenblatt said, "at business schools, in boardrooms, at job fairs." Perhaps attributable to his early days as an entrepreneur, Greenblatt did seem to suggest change largely occurs from the ground up. He reminded the audience that start-ups have always been an engine of economic growth in the United States. The Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation sees a bright future for the country by creating conditions and rules for lots of start-ups.
Greenblatt explained that President Obama created the Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation as part of a broad agenda of innovation. He suggested that President Obama's legacy, while this task is best left to historians, would be that he has elevated innovation as policy. This agenda is largely about technology and data, but social innovation clearly has an important place too. Greenblatt emphasized that the office is about three words: elevating community solutions. He suggested that Obama's motivations for this approach come not only from his experiences as a community organizer, but also because the President sees this as an "all-hands-on-deck" moment in the United States.
The Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation is focused on developing federal support for ground-up solutions. The answers to development problems, Greenblatt explained, lie not in Washington but in communities, where solutions are already being enacted by the people who live and work there. The office aims to help communities in a few ways. They identify what is working and either add support to scale up operations, spotlight them when they need it, or kick-start projects with seed funding.
The Office is interested in advancing both human and financial capital to support social innovation. To develop human capital, they are expanding opportunities for national service through AmeriCorps. To attract and leverage financial capital, they created the Social Innovation Fund. Greenblatt described this as a fund of funds, that provides growth capital for high impact nonprofits using local intermediaries to allocate funding. The fund's strengths are in its ability to build local networks and match investor capital at good ratios.
An audience member also asked whether the field of impact investing is undercapitalized, to which Greenblatt answered affirmatively and added constructively with the question "How can we unlock capital?" The office can make it easier for money managers to deploy capital in new ways. One such way is by innovating sectorally-collaborative financial instruments towards public goals, such as Pay for Success Bonds, a type of Social Impact Bond. With these bonds, the return on investment can be between 10-20%, which money managers like, while governments spend less and nonprofits get the cash-flow they need to run services.
If it were possible to identify a single message to take away from the day and Greenblatt’s keynote address, it would be that there is a promising future for what can be achieved with blended-value finance and enterprise, and that much of this work is already underway.
Registration is now open for the March 2012 Charities Information Webinars
Redefining Risk in Impact Investing
Though Bonnie Wong, former Investment Manager with Vancity’s Community Capital team discussed risk explicitly at several points in her presentation, the theme of re-defining risk in the field of impact investing resonated through all presentations and conversations at “Making an Impact through Social Finance”.
The Canadian Global Impact Investing Group (CGIIG), held this event for a mixed audience of investors, students, business and political leaders in downtown Vancouver on Wednesday, November 23rd, 2011. CGIIG (which you can read about and join here) was founded in 2011 to raise awareness around the growing field of impact investing in a Canadian context and to connect investors with social ventures. This event invited 4 speakers representing different organizations to present on their activities in the impact investing space.
Jocelyn Ling from the Vancouver chapter of Acumen Fund spoke about guiding themes of the organization: patient capital and moral leadership. Jocelyn used Acumen Fund’s investment in WaterHealth International to illustrate the innovative, risk-taking approach of the organization. Today, over 4 million people have access to WaterHealth International’s clean drinking water and the enterprise has catalyzed an industry in clean water provision.
Vancity’s Community Capital team represented the biggest impact investor at the event, with $80 million in assets under management. Vancity recently announced and publicly launched their new high impact social enterprise lending and investment program, Resilient Capital.
The Global Catalyst Initiative, a local grass roots organization that invests in emerging entrepreneurs in developing countries, was represented by its President, Sean Peters.
Sean’s organization aims to bridge the gap between early-stage entrepreneurs and social enterprises that are “Acumen-ready”, e.g. in a position to take on $250K or more in financing to fuel their growth. Sean summed up the energy of this organization when he appropriately said, “to us at GCI, risk is really exciting”.
Brady Josephson, Director of Marketing and Communications at Opportunity International Canada, explained the organization’s rural agriculture finance model. Opportunity International works towards poverty alleviation through the provision of microfinance services, training and counsel. It was interesting to learn about the organization’s “informed lending” approach, which involves crop profiling, household profiling, and land mapping, collectively aimed at making financial services accessible to the base of the pyramid, but with a conscious effort to avoid over indebtedness.
All four of these organizations were well represented through charismatic story telling and compelling business models. Following the presentations, the floor was opened for questions from the audience. Some of the themes that emerged from this and the subsequent post-event conversation included:
- Failure and challenges in the field of impact investing
- How can risk, return, and impact be evaluated together?
- The implications of the “demand side”: as the capital available through impact investing grows, what kind of support is being provided to social entrepreneurs?
- How can these ideas become more mainstream?
Overall, the evening was informative and inspiring. It was a great opportunity for impact investing supporters in Vancouver to learn and network. We are looking forward to the next CGIIG event!
Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/benandjenn/3570635394/
Video: Catherine Clark on Social Impact Assessment
Discussions about social enterprise and not-for-profits are often dominated by the topic of measurement. Measuring output, outcomes, and impact can be useful for improving organizations and, furthermore, investors and donors increasingly demand such data.
Catherine Clark is an Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Center for the Advancement of Social Entrepreneurship (CASE) at Duke University and directs the Research Initiative on Social Entrepreneurship at (RISE) Columbia University, and discusses social impact assessment in this short video. She explains that compelling data adds value to an organization's story, and describes several kinds of data.
Output data includes information about your activity, perhaps related to your daily operations. For example, how many are involved in your programs? How many people complete your programs?
Outcome data ties your regular activities to some effect as a result of your output. This measure refers to changes your organization has made to ongoing measures of societal problems. For example, if you run a prisoner rehabilitation program, what is the effect on recidivism rates you've made?
Impact assessment, though frequently discussed, is a long-term complex measure that most organizations are not equipped to reasonably track on a regular basis. Therefore, Catherine Clark suggests impact data is less important than output and outcome data.
What do you think? Does your organization measure social impact? What measure do you use, and how do you collect your data?
Social Impact Bonds May be Coming To Ontario: Celebration and Cautions
The Commission on the Reform of Ontario's Public Services, also known as the Drummond Report, has landed at Queen’s Park with a considerable thud, and not only because it is 6 cm thick. The report calls for significant cuts and changes to the Ontario government as we know it.
On the constructive side and particularly relevant to social finance, the Report recommends that the Ontario government implement social impact bonds (SIBs).
Simply put, these are contractual partnerships between government, investors and social service organizations whereby social outcome targets are set, programs are funded by new private capital, and if - and only if - targets are achieved, government pays out a return to investors, derived from cost savings due to reduced need for other social services. For example, if a senior is able to stay out of hospitals because of effective home health care services, a percentage of the cost savings to government are paid to the private investor that funded the original service.
Without a doubt, this recommendation is good news. Social impact bonds are an opportunity increase critically needed funding available to the social service sector, driving towards impact, creating social good, and providing a platform for private sector participation. As the Task Force on Social Finance report puts it “… long-term financial backing for SIBs will enable organizations with effective solutions to highly-targeted problems to scale their impact, leading to a virtuous cycle of taxpayer savings, greater private investment in prevention, and progress toward our social, health and environmental goals."
That being said, as we move forward there are a few key questions about the details and the big picture that need be resolved.
The Drummond Report is thin on specifics regarding SIBs, neglecting to make any pronouncements on some key issues: What kinds of government-provided social services is this approach appropriate for? The most famous social impact bond pilot comes from the UK where criminal recidivism is being tackled. Happily, social impact bonds lend themselves to pro-active and preventative strategies. Can the model be stretched to challenges where the benefits to government spending are harder to measure, or longer term, such as high school dropout prevention?
Related to this, is there any risk that this model skews the activities of the not for profit sector, leading them to inappropriately scale interventions that have worked in a certain context but cannot simply be done more. Further, does the importance of metrics and evaluation exclude smaller organizations and local-scale projects?
In order to attract new capital, are there any incentives the government might need to offer? In the traditional model, the private investor assumes all the risk and their investment is lost if the desired social change is not achieved. Should the Ontario government or others such as foundations or individual philanthropists, sweeten the pot by putting up some first-loss capital?
For a deeper dive, Adam Jagelewski has written an excellent paper analyzing the potential for social impact bonds in Canada [PDF] and some specifics that need to be considered.
And finally, looking at the bigger picture, while social impact bonds represent collaboration between government, capital and social service organizations, who is in charge? The increasingly squeezed not-for-profit sector has long worried about how far it sometimes goes to chase foundation grants and government funding. How can social impact bonds be implemented in a way that neither compromises the wisdom and leadership of the not-for-profit sector, nor diminishes the fundamental responsibility of government to define social policy and support residents?
This is not an argument against social impact bonds, simply a caution that in this environment of scarcity and opportunity, new capital will be powerful. We must move forward in a balanced manner - and answering the questions above is the first step.
Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/cabbit/469423718/
Financing Social Returns in Southeast Asia: Synergy Social Ventures
Part 1 of this blog post highlighted some difficulties faced by social entrepreneurs in Asia; Part 2 profiles Synergy Social Ventures, which supports social enterprise, and ties in lessons for the broader world of social finance.
Synergy Social Ventures is a not-for-profit organization that was created in response to the challenges we saw preventing social enterprises from accelerating in Southeast Asia and China. In our work with entrepreneurs throughout the region, we identified a number of commonalities.
Firstly, the vast majority of ventures are in their early stages, in need of support to navigate the new sector they are entering. They need access to knowledge and to learn about best practices related to building social enterprise models. Secondly, there is a lack of appropriate financing for their impact-focused ventures - financing that is aligned with their impact-focused strategies.
One particular gap we’ve identified in our region is a deficiency in capital available to impact-focused enterprises who cannot meet a hurdle financial rate of return for investors. Financial returns are a significant consideration for funders - even those that self identify as “impact” focused investors usually seek a return of 3-5% in addition to social return. There is a lot of buzz and hype about impact investing, in particular “financial-first impact investing” - the idea of achieving both a social impact and a competitive financial return through an investment.
While it is great that financial investors are looking at the effects that their investment activity has on society and the environment, the excitement about the possibility of “having it all” - solving problems while generating strong financial returns - is creating a gap, through which many social ventures with high potential to generate significant social returns are falling.
At Synergy Social Ventures, we work with small and early stage ventures tackling difficult problems in some of the poorest areas of the world. Most are addressing issues that, until recently, have only been supported through direct and ongoing grants and donations. These new entrepreneurs, however, are working toward more effective solutions that are also sustainable, in that they will not need to rely on ongoing donations in the long-term.
This step alone has had a significant effect on the social returns on a financial “investment”, even when the investment is a grant that will set in motion impact that will continue to be generated in the future. Taking this to the next level, if the venture is able to return the original grant, or even a portion of it, and the funds are used to seed another venture, the social return generated by the funds increases further.
Social finance encompasses a broad spectrum of means of using financial capital to create social impact. What’s happening in our region reminds us that to fully benefit from the opportunities afforded by different models of social finance, we must not get caught up in one aspect that happens to be the “model du jour”.
Instead, we must assess situations within their own contexts to determine how financial capital can best be used to catalyze social impact. This could be through investment capital that generates social in addition to financial returns, but it could also be through philanthropic capital that is stretched further than the traditional 100% loss. Or it could fall somewhere in between.
The question to ask is not what financial return was generated, rather, was financial capital utilized in the most effective way possible to address a particular need? Looking at social finance models from this perspective will open up a wider range of possibilities to effectively use capital to create social impact.
Financing Social Returns in Southeast Asia: Barriers
The concepts of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship are newer to Southeast Asia and China than to other parts of the world. If someone was asked to name the most successful social enterprises globally, it is unlikely that an individual or organization from Southeast Asia or China would be the first to come to mind.
But a closer look at the region reveals many entrepreneurial individuals and teams creating impact in innovative ways and striving to develop business models that will financially sustain and grow their organizations. Across Southeast Asia and China, impact focused enterprises are sprouting, growing and building solutions to social, economic, and environmental problems through different business models. They are creating opportunities for women who face barriers to employment, developing distribution systems designed to meet the needs of the poorest consumers and smallest retailers, and developing local economies by creating livelihood opportunities.
As these enterprises demonstrate how impact can be achieved through innovation and interaction with the market, more entrepreneurs with exciting ideas are developing new ventures and turning their ideas into impact.
Take Charles, a student from Hong Kong for whom access to a computer and the internet meant the ability to find the answer to any question. He wanted students like himself in all parts of the world, even those without internet or electricity, to have access to information that would allow them to learn and explore. To address this problem, Charles modified a modern desktop computer to run at low voltage, using solar power. The computer is equipped to hold a large digital library, and comes pre-loaded with offline educational content. Through his social enterprise, SolarLEAP, Charles has now brought computers and digital libraries to off-the-grid communities in Nepal and the Philippines, and beyond Asia to Ghana, Ethiopia and India.
Despite the impact created by entrepreneurs like Charles, new social entrepreneurs in Southeast Asia and China face many challenges. There is often a lack of local understanding of and support for their models. Language barriers prevent some would-be entrepreneurs from accessing available resources, and the sector is still fragmented, in need of strong sector networks through which entrepreneurs and their supporters can build relationships and collaborate.
One of the greatest hurdles to overcome is the lack of appropriate financing available for impact-focused ventures. Time and time again we see entrepreneurs in this region spending a disproportionate amount of time and energy looking for funding, instead of focusing on building and growing their ventures. One cause of this funding gap stems from the fact that different models of social finance that were developed in specific contexts in different parts of the world were introduced in Asia all at once, leaving new funders confused about what a social finance model should look like. What kind of financial returns should social investors seek in addition to social returns? What does the ideal social enterprise look like? Is social finance philanthropy or is it investing?
While there is no one answer to these questions, the confusion about the different models of social enterprise and social finance has resulted in a situation where few matches between funders and entrepreneurs are being made, and entrepreneurs have little access to the critical capital they need to seed their ventures.
Consequently, there is a need for an organization that can provide support to social enterprises and help them answer these tough questions. Part II of this blog post profiles just such an organization.
Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/worldworldworld/4352771740/
The Canada Revenue Agency revokes the registration of Escarpment Biosphere Foundation Inc. as a charity
Social Finance Round Up: ClimateSpark Social Venture Challenge Takes Centre Stage
SocialFinance.ca produces a weekly round up featuring social finance related news, insights, job openings, and events. We source the content for these round ups from Twitter, an RSS reader, and directly from our community of social finance practitioners. Below is our round up for the week of February 13, 2012.
Last Week on SocialFinance.ca
Timothy Nash published Occupy Your Assets on February 6, 2012.
Bree Gardner published Social Finance Round Up: Environmental Finance and Green Investing Pick Up Steam on February 7, 2012.
Nabeel Ahmed published The ClimateSpark Venture Challenge: Social Ventures for Climate Change on February 8, 2012.
Allison Langille published Introducing SocialFinance.ca’s New Assistant Editors (Winter 2012) on February 9, 2012.
Nabeel Ahmed published Video: The ClimateSpark Social Venture Challenge on February 11, 2012
Canadian and International News
Israel Electric Corporation has issued a $500 million bond for institutional investors in the US to buy solar energy capacity to replace gas from Egypt.
Private equity firm Actis has introduced a tool to assess the environmental and social impacts of its investments in the energy sector. The Energy Impact Model systematically captures the key drivers that build value and helps to identify where action is required.
Essex County Council has confirmed plans to use social impact bonds to finance family and community-based work with young people on the edge of care or custody in the UK.
New Philanthropy Capital is launching a survey of the UK’s largest charities that will attempt to build a picture of how the organizations are coping with new, more complex and competitive commissioning arrangements, such as payment-by-results.
Euromoney reports that private banks are looking to help clients move away from a greed-is-good mentality. In the article, they argue that if impact investing takes off, it will be driven not by political interference but rather by the interference and assistance of the wealthiest individuals and their banks.
The Department of Energy and Climate has given £20m in funding to Salix Finance, an independent not-for-profit organization, as part of its interest-free loans scheme (SEELS). Any organization across the public sector can now apply for loans to fund energy efficient schemes that pay for themselves within five years through lower energy bills.
Climate Bonds Initiative blogs that while the solar market’s woes are unhelpful to the broader renewable energy market, many of the issues are specific to the industry and therefore should not inhibit the borrowing ability of corporations operating in other renewable energy activities.
Social Enterprise reports that social entrepreneurs around Europe will have the chance to scoop €10,000 and put their names on tubs of ice cream in a groundbreaking contest launched earlier this month by Ben & Jerry’s and Ashoka. “At a time when more questions are being asked about the attitudes of traditional businesses to social justice, the environment and communities, this is an udderly fantastic opportunity for entrepreneurs with a passion for sustainability and changing the way business is done in Europe,” the ice cream pioneers said today.
Acumen Fund has issued a $1 million USD loan to microfinance institution GUARDIAN (Gramalaya Urban And Rural Development Initiatives And Network) to finance water and sanitation needs in India. The loan will play a critical role in helping GUARDIAN build its portfolio and transition from a partially grant-funded NGO to a fully self-sustaining microfinance institution.
Based on the results of a survey of Triple Jump’s clients, Triple Jump news reports that microfinance institutions are looking to upscale their services for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and, in doing so, to close the much-debated credit gap.
Unitus Seed Fund announces that it has made an investment in Hippocampus Learning Centres (HLC) based in Bangalore. HLC is building affordable rural learning centres that serve children at the base of the economic pyramid.
Leonardo Letelier, founder and CEO of sitawi, talks about setting up the first social enterprise fund in Brazil.
StartSomeGood co-founder Tom Dawkins talks about crowdfunding for social enterprises in an interview by Rachel Signer.
Social Finance Learning and Best Practices
The Rockefeller Foundation and SocialFinanceUS released a paper on how social impact bonds can mobilize private capital to advance social good. The new publication offers a framework for both the promise and challenges of social impact bonds as state and local governments within the US begin to explore this new innovation.
Nexii’s Kelly Notcutt takes some valuable time out to discuss developments around social and environmental impact reporting with Jeremy Nicholls, Advisory Board member and CEO of the SROI Network.
Chris Prottas, MPA Candidate at NYU, provides a case study on assessing the cost-effectiveness of impact investing.
Grassroots Business Fund (GBF) shares its Impact Planning, Assessment and Learning (iPAL) framework [PDF], which enables GBF and its portfolio companies to track and analyze finance, operational, and social metrics against established goals in order to improve management decisions.
Harvard Business School Associate Professor Julie Battilana shares the results of analyzing six years’ worth of Echoing Green fellowship applicants - helping impact investors to better understand evolving opportunities in the social enterprise space.
Robert Ashton outlines the benefits of investing in community development finance institutions, including the relatively safe nature of the investments and the accompanying tax breaks.
Ndubuisi Ekekwe, founder of the not-for-profit African Institution of Technology, discusses the emerging opportunities for impact investing in Africa this decade via the Harvard Business Review.
Using the example of India, Manju Mary George, co-founder of Intellecap and part of the World Economic Forum's Global Shapers Community, discusses how big business investment in the bottom of the pyramid through partnerships with social enterprises can generate inclusive growth.
Ian Cain, a first-year MBA student at Duke University, reflects on a recent visit from Ron D. Cordes, co-chairman of Genworth Financial Wealth Management and founder of ImpactAssets, a non-profit financial services company that aims to aggregate and deploy capital in sustainable social enterprises.
Five Talents Blog interviews Lillian Mwikali about her experiences as a microfinance loan officer in Thika, Kenya.
In this Forbes’ video, Arabella Advisors’ Eric Kessler, who works with billionaires on how to change the world through philanthropy, shares the top five trends for wealthy donors in 2012, including a desire for some of the planet’s richest people to become more engaged in impact investing.
Mark Hand of the First Light India Accelerator, a seed-fund pilot and joint effort of Shell Foundation and First Light Ventures, describes how the market for seed-funding for social enterprises is heating up fast - especially in India - and what this means.
Micro-lending to the more unlikely: the Economist explores microfinance for non-traditional populations.
Recent Discoveries
GoodGuide - provides the world’s largest and most reliable source of information on the health, environmental, and social impacts of consumer products.
Upcoming Events
Latin American Impact Investment Forum: Business for Development
February 13-15, 2012, Merida, Yucatan
Environmental Bonds 2012
February 15, 2012, Eversheds’ Office, London, United Kingdom
World Bank Institute Climate Finance Workshop for the Eastern Caribbean
February 14-17, 2012, Saint Lucia
SROI Network International Conference
February 16th-17, University of Potsdam, Campus Griebnitzsee, Germany
Webinar: Growing The Outcomes Finance Market: Challenges & Routes Forward
February 16, 2012, Online.
Scaling up REDD+ Webinar Series
Webinar series to be held on four consecutive Thursdays starting February 23, 2012
Microfinance Experts Speaker Series: Ann Miles
Thursday, February 16, 2012, Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto.
Social Economy Centre Speakers' Series: Rise Asset Development
February 22, 2012, Room 3-104, OISE (University of Toronto), 252 Bloor St. West, Toronto
World Water-Tech Investment Summit 2012
February 28-29, 2012, London, United Kingdom
SOCAP: Soul
March 3, 2012, Hub SOMA, San Francisco
Social Enterprise Dragons (Enterprising Non-Profits)
March 8, 2012, Goldcorp Centre for the Arts, 149 West Hastings Street, Vancouver, BC
100WHF-Stanford PACS Conference: Alpha & Altruism - Channeling the Power of Finance for Social Change
March 23, 2012, Boston Harbor Hotel, Boston, MA
Powering deals with purpose - Partnering for Global Impact 2012
July 9-10, Lugano, Switzerland
Did we miss any news, insights, or events? Use the comment form below to add to this round up.
Photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/benimoto/603815615/
Video: The ClimateSpark Social Venture Challenge
With the ClimateSpark Launch Gala taking place this week, and the announcement of the Toronto Community Foundation Green Innovation Award, it's only natural that this week's Video is the one played at the glittering event on Wednesday night.
Missed the overview post a few days ago?* Don't worry. Jason Wagar of Toronto Community Foundation, Eli Malinsky of the Centre for Social Innovation, and Julia Langer of the Toronto Atmospheric Fund are the best people to explain what the ClimateSpark Social Venture Challenge was and what happened over the last several months. This excellent video by the folks at BroughtToYouBy.tv will help to give you a strong sense of how this process played out.
"The climate crisis really needs absolutely every brain molecule we have, and every iota of energy and enthusiasm." Jula Langer, Toronto Atmospheric Fund
*If you're interested in reading more about the event, you can start off with the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario's thoughts, as well as this overview of the Centre for Social Innovation's contribution . The ClimateSpark team was understandably happy, and the Toronto Atmospheric Fund also posted a celebratory blog post.
We invite you to share your thoughts about this video below. Have you been a part of the ClimateSpark journey over the past few months? Were you at the Gala last week? What did you think?
Introducing SocialFinance.ca’s New Assistant Editors (Winter 2012)
It is through the collaboration of ideas and experiences that the team at SocialFinance.ca can bring thoughtful discussions to the social finance community each week. In this spirit, we recently brought on several new Assistant Editors to enhance our network with their passion for impact investing and diverse professional backgrounds. To introduce readers to our new contributors, each Assistant Editor was asked what, in their opinion, impact investing needs to move forward.
Becky Slater is a recent MBA graduate who is actively involved in the areas of environmental finance, social enterprise, and not-for-profit management. In addition to providing research support to the Canadian Director of the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) around global climate finance developments, she is working on a variety of strategic initiatives at PLAN Toronto, an innovative not-for-profit social enterprise. Prior to her MBA, Becky spent several years working in the financial services industry and as a marketer, fundraiser, and researcher at UNICEF Canada. She graduated with a Bachelor of Commerce from Queen’s University and has a Graduate Diploma in Nonprofit Management and Leadership from the Schulich School of Business.
What is the most important thing needed for impact investing to move forward?
In my opinion, what impact investing requires most to move forward is a strong, growing network of organizations and leaders from all sectors. This includes philanthropy, business, government, academia, social enterprise and communities, committed to working together to advance the field – exactly what the MaRS Centre for Impact Investing is offering. Through open, ongoing dialogue and genuine collaboration, this network can serve as a platform for addressing the key items required to move impact investing forward: establishing credible, comparable metrics and standards for measuring impact, increasing awareness, and achieving critical policy reforms, among others.
Sara Lyons is the Program Director for Community Foundations of Canada, a membership organization of over 175 community foundations across Canada (currently on leave). She was formerly a Program Officer for the Toronto Community Foundation and a Managing Coordinator for the Toronto City Summit Alliance, now Civic Action. She is particularly interested in the role of philanthropy in social finance. Sara has a BA in from McGill University and an MA in Political Science from the University of Toronto and is the mother of two young daughters.
What is the most important thing needed for impact investing to move forward?
For me, moving impact investing forward doesn't come down to perfecting the regulatory environment or developing the right financing model, although these things are important. Most critical is supporting and sharing early successes that inspire others and change mindsets around the possible. The details will get worked out when the demand and interest require that the path be cleared.
Bree Gardner is a freelance photojournalist based out of Calgary, Alberta. Having worked in the not-for-profit industry since she was 14, Bree has cultivated a deep passion for the nuanced industry that is development and aid. Her passion was lit when, at 16, she traveled to Ecuador to spend time with tribes in the Amazon. Two long years later, and she lost her heart to the small West African country of Sierra Leone. Still ravaged from the ten-year civil war, Bree saw the wisdom of the communities, the strength from hardship, and the hard-working desire to free themselves from poverty. It was then that she partnered with the local NGO and MFI Community Initiative Program, and has since been involved with a number of local and international efforts to give aid to those most desperate, be it in the beleaguered and war-torn countries of abroad, or the often overlooked poverty that dwells on the streets in North America.
What is the most important thing needed for impact investing to move forward?
Like anyone associated with social finance, I have a bucket list of legislation and adaptive policies I’d love to see pave a way for easier innovation and co-existence of blended values in traditional business models. But I’m not going to talk about that. More important than standards and policies (as those will inevitably progress and are likely already being addressed), is to value passion and involvement. To advance impact investing we need people - and not just accountants and investors. We need small business owners, grassroot organization directors and the general public to understand and trust the brand and impact of social investments. Being involved, be it talking to a friend, reading SocialFinance.ca or initiating and participating in organizations already with a foot in the door, is what will continue this path towards a more ethically and socially-minded financial world. As clichéd as all this sounds, we have everything we need to advance impact investing, and it’s already happening. All that is left is to keep that wheel turning....along with some forward-thinking policy changes.
Ryan is a graduate of the University of Toronto (International Relations and Political Science), and a MA candidate at the Institute of Political Economy at Carleton University. His research is about the rise of the social economy and its implications for the not-for-profit sector. Ryan previously co-authored a history of Canada's Industry Department for internal use and was a contributing editor for the Paterson Review of International Affairs. Ryan recently worked with a not-for-profit start-up that supports social enterprises creating jobs in developing countries. He currently lives in New York City, where he is completing his graduate research.
What is the most important thing needed for impact investing to move forward?
A lot of what is required to advance impact investing is common to any type of investing - standards for measuring performance are important. Organizations and products must be scalable to be ready for investment. Awareness must be cultivated among investors and entrepreneurs. Much of this good work is being by the MaRS Centre for Impact Investing. In my opinion, the most important and pressing need for impact investing to move forward is for governments to quickly adapt policy, legislation, and regulation. There are still barriers for corporate entities to harbor obligations other than profit, so it can be difficult to commit to social, environmental, or community-related missions. There are practical disincentives for nonprofit organizations to become more enterprising, to incorporate a business model or become profitable. For impact investing to thrive, governments must create accessible and secure conditions for participation.
Allison Langille began her career working with a community-oriented group of businesses called The Uncommon Group, where she managed the day-to-day operations of two retail storefronts while contributing to strategy and product development. Recognizing a deep interest in both entrepreneurship and international economic development, Allison then worked as a Project Officer at CARE Canada, where she helped establish a social venture finance fund tailored to small enterprises in East Africa. Allison is currently focused on enabling microfinance institutions – she has worked with organizations in Canada, Kenya, Zambia and most recently in Kolkata, India where she spent 2011 building the social performance management practices for a growing MFI. Allison sits on the Board of Directors for the Toronto Friendship Center, the Board of Advisors for a Zambian-based micro asset financing company and holds a Bachelor of Commerce from Saint Mary's University.
What is the most important thing needed for impact investing to move forward?
I believe that for impact investing to truly move forward in a meaningful way, industry players must work to best define the parameters of the term 'impact' itself. It is often difficult to merge the concepts of commercial and social returns; recognizing this is an important first step to identifying exactly where the impact should be - bottom line or in line with the social mission? While this may not necessarily mean developing rigorous and unified social performance indicators, it does mean developing clear organizational awareness of the desired social impact. Once impact investment organizations are able to carve out and commit fully to their stated social impact - the industry will undoubtedly evolve in a positive way.
