Comments on: The Gates Foundations http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/01/the-gates-foundations Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:15:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Tom Williams http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/01/the-gates-foundations#comment-54 Tom Williams Fri, 12 Jan 2007 22:41:18 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/01/12/the-gates-foundations/#comment-54 I was originally going to include the option of Private Equity or Venture Capital as alternatives to having to invest in public companies with market-caps big enough to support them. While not for everyone, I am inspired by the number of "hybrid" structures that are committed to specific mandates and committed to multiple mechanisms (including investing in for-profit companies) to accomplish those mandates. As Africa is personally my big passion, this is the approach I'm taking and encouraging my friends to do the same. Luckily this attitude seems to be increasing in attitude and practice. --Tom I was originally going to include the option of Private Equity or Venture Capital as alternatives to having to invest in public companies with market-caps big enough to support them.

While not for everyone, I am inspired by the number of “hybrid” structures that are committed to specific mandates and committed to multiple mechanisms (including investing in for-profit companies) to accomplish those mandates.

As Africa is personally my big passion, this is the approach I’m taking and encouraging my friends to do the same.

Luckily this attitude seems to be increasing in attitude and practice.

–Tom

]]> By: Sean Stannard-Stockton http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/01/the-gates-foundations#comment-53 Sean Stannard-Stockton Fri, 12 Jan 2007 15:57:44 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/01/12/the-gates-foundations/#comment-53 Good point, Tom. I tried to clarify in my post that I'm not talking specifically about SRI and instead am talking about investment management and grant making working together. Simply screening out certain companies is not always going to be the best solution. As you point out, the Gates Foundation in particular might find it hard to pursue an effective investment strategy if they screened out all companies that have any connection to activities they are working to change. Another question is whether screening out any companies in smart. Maybe the Gates Foundation would feel they were best served by being large, active owners of these companies so they would be in a position to influence their actions. Good point, Tom. I tried to clarify in my post that I’m not talking specifically about SRI and instead am talking about investment management and grant making working together. Simply screening out certain companies is not always going to be the best solution. As you point out, the Gates Foundation in particular might find it hard to pursue an effective investment strategy if they screened out all companies that have any connection to activities they are working to change.

Another question is whether screening out any companies in smart. Maybe the Gates Foundation would feel they were best served by being large, active owners of these companies so they would be in a position to influence their actions.

]]> By: Tom Williams http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/01/the-gates-foundations#comment-52 Tom Williams Fri, 12 Jan 2007 15:46:26 +0000 http://tacticalphilanthropy.com/2007/01/12/the-gates-foundations/#comment-52 Without a doubt foundations should strive to align their asset management with the values and operations of their philanthropic activities; and where possible, invest in socially responsible companies that have proven to generate good R.O.I. HOWEVER, I can see (from a pure investment strategy perspective), why the Gates Foundation might find this difficult to do. With the amount of assets that they must invest, whilst keeping with their investment policies (in terms of % ownership, liquidity, risk exposure etc), I think it may prove difficult if not impossible for the Gates Foundation in particular to align their investments with activities. In short, until the progressive, socially responsible companies become as big and relatively stable - on a market cap basis - as the leaders of the industrials, I can't see how the largest foundations to do this. This should not discourage "the rest of us" in advocating for this kind of alignment but my above point is one I feel being left out of the conversation on this topic. Without a doubt foundations should strive to align their asset management with the values and operations of their philanthropic activities; and where possible, invest in socially responsible companies that have proven to generate good R.O.I.

HOWEVER, I can see (from a pure investment strategy perspective), why the Gates Foundation might find this difficult to do.

With the amount of assets that they must invest, whilst keeping with their investment policies (in terms of % ownership, liquidity, risk exposure etc), I think it may prove difficult if not impossible for the Gates Foundation in particular to align their investments with activities.

In short, until the progressive, socially responsible companies become as big and relatively stable - on a market cap basis - as the leaders of the industrials, I can’t see how the largest foundations to do this.

This should not discourage “the rest of us” in advocating for this kind of alignment but my above point is one I feel being left out of the conversation on this topic.

]]>