How Do IC's Actually Work?

Lucas Turner-Owens: Welcome to Impacted. I'm Eric Horvath, here with my co-host Rodney Foxworth. Today we're talking about Philanthropic Foundations and their investment committees, the bodies that quietly steward the endowments that power Foundation grantmaking. And I say quietly because people aren't really paying attention enough to them. Here's the number that reframes everything. Foundations are legally required to distribute five percent of their assets every year for charitable purposes. That's the grantmaking, the work most people associate with philanthropy. The other ninety five percent sits in an endowment, which is overseen by an investment committee. That committee holds enormous power over whether a foundation's capital is actually aligned with its mission. And yet, the people sitting at that table don't always reflect the communities those foundations exist to serve. In this conversation, we talk about the investment policy statement, arguably a foundation's second most important document after its bylaws, yet one that most board members have never actually read. And we also hear firsthand what it's been like to push investment advisors and consultants towards more mission-aligned investing before it was as popular as it is today. Rodney and I are excited to be joined by our friends and colleagues, Rini Bannerjee and George Suttles, who, between them, sit on many philanthropic investment committees and have been leaders in the space of diversifying who has a seat at these tables. Our goal today is simple: to demystify what investment committees actually are. who gets to be on them, and what it would mean for the field if that changed. Let's get into it. You know, a lot of folks aren't thinking about investment committees, or they don't understand the role that an investment committee has. If, for example, you're an emerging fund manager, you're raising for your first, maybe your second fund, you're interacting with an investment committee, and you don't actually know what the rules of engagement are or what actually an investment committee is. So I would love for both of you to share a bit about like It's very seasoned investment committee members who've seen a lot of different things, have worked with a a range of different folks. How would you sort of, you know, articulate to people who are unfamiliar with investment committees how you see your role? Well, I think even just to step back, I think sometimes is to understand you know, what is the investment committee, right? The investment committee is a typically it is the fiduciary steward of the endowment. It sets investment policy, it approves investment policy statement, it monitors performance, ⁓ ensures the investment strategy ⁓ to s you know, so that it can serve the foundation's long-term mission. It also has a really powerful ⁓ practice of actually reviewing you know, the organizational's budget and payout. Like that I think sometimes it's actually I mean, we look at investment committees just investments, but it it is really, as you said, Rodney, powerful. It it is I I I find it to be like It is powerful, this committee. And so I feel like the roles and responsibilities of the investment committee is there there's quite a bit of and and then when you layer impact into it, it's like that's a whole nother deeper level that I feel like is actually the most important, right? Like we're looking at, you know, that we're regularly asking our portfolio to do as much work for our, you know, as our grant making, and we're evaluating our returns ⁓ on how we're deploying capital. So I think the roles and responsibilities of an investment committee member are multiple, but fundamentally it is about focusing on mission of the foundation, really understanding like what is the impact that you are trying to make. And then how do you actually ⁓ really operationalize that within the investment committee through talking to your investment advisor and really, you know, putting them to task around like how are we really thinking about like the fundamental core of where this capital is going. ⁓ And I and you know, I always say this for for investment committee members. I'm like, I don't even need investment committee committee members to understand like the due diligence of fund managers, honestly, right? Like I feel like what's important is like for the fund managers, the ones that are gonna be sort of selected or recommended are ones that are fundamentally core to what the foundation is looking for impact. And and how is that fund manager proving that out? So I think to me and and also like I think there's something around being an investment committee too, particular particularly when you're looking at impact, you're looking at a risk profile that should be actually equally ⁓ I I I think it's equally as like what we think of our grantees on the social justice side, right? We are actually looking at grantees that are looking at risk in a very expansive way. And we are putting our grant money in that risk. We want you to do your job. It is risky because you're gonna have out like incredible impact for communities. And I feel like that should mirror the the investment and investment committee when we think about how do we select managers and funds. Like how are how are how are they looking at, you know, what kind of impact they're having and ⁓ investment committee members really I I don't know. I feel like again, maybe George, you said it too. It's just like we have to have like the focus. It's like we have to have the focus of like fundamentally believing that our deployment of our investment capital is actually making impact that connects to our mission. And that mission is for justice. Like the one foundations that I sit on for it or, you know, chair investment committees. So that's what I would say. Renee, I want to jump in because you shared a lot that deeply resonates, but the What I always find really interesting, ⁓ and you began to frame this, is that the investment committee a lot of times is asked to do very technical work in a silo around, you know, investment stewardship. But the reality is, is that The investment committee is being charged with managing the other 90 to 95% of the assets. Very much to your point. So we'll sit in board meetings and spend a lion's share of the meeting talking about operations and programs, but that's only being supported by five to seven percent of the assets. And then the investment committee or or the provider or the investment manager will come in and give a 10-minute report. And we're like, all right, well, well, what are we what are we asking the investment committee to explore or interrogate? Why aren't we spending more time with this, you know, in a way that is expansive and inclusive of program staff, of other board members? Right? So it's just, it's very the the the dynamics are really, really interesting is where the the the power and influence and our ability to really impact. The and advance the mission in some ways arguably sits in the in the investment committee. But we don't ask the investment committee, we don't lead with the investment committee work and say, How should we be thinking about this? If this is a lever that we're pulling to advance mission. Who who else should be chiming in? What other voices should be invited in? But we do that with grant making, participatory grant making, you know. ⁓ getting feed advisory groups from grantees and community members, but it's like it i if if there's incredible influence and power sitting with the investment committee because they're stewarding the other ninety-five percent of the assets, we should be spending a lot more time there and we should be inviting a lot more people in to participate. So George, in ⁓ in the philanthropic sense, because we're talking about philanthropic ⁓ endowments and investment committees, why do you think that is the case? In terms of not having more people chime in, not being more enfranchising, despite that being part of the DNA of a lot of philanthropies and grantmaking organizations. Yeah, I mean, I I think it's a it' a a few things, and I'm I'm I'm I'm probably not going to provide an exhaustive list or commentary around this, but one, I think there's ⁓ and Rene alluded to this, I think there's a disconnect between sort of the baseline level of knowledge needed to participate, if that makes sense. And so I think when people look at the investment committee and the work that the investment committee bark ⁓ embarks in, they say, ⁓ well, I don't have an MBA. I don't manage portfolios. I don't know what stocks and bonds are, or what portfolio construction means, or asset allocation. So there's a there's a there's a there's a deference to those who do, right? And those who do who have the technical expertise get to participate. But I think if you've got an investment committee that's got a different orientation, they'll create space for participation and involvement. And so I think that's something that's ⁓ really exciting, right? So there's a I mean, I used to work in healthcare, so I think it's the same thing with like medicine and doctors, right? You go to your doctor and the doctor's like, You don't have an MD, you didn't go to med school and a residency for 10, 12 years, just defer to me. I will tell you what's best for you. But Patients still have to advocate for themselves and we need to teach them to do that, right? We need to give them a baseline level of understanding on how to navigate their own healthcare so that they can appropriately advocate for themselves. And I think we can do that in this space in this space too. ⁓ I also think that in a lot of ways, folks don't realize that that's where a lot of the action is. Sorry to use the colloquialism, but people look at the grant making and the programs work and and ⁓ the partnership work and they're like, Yeah, that seems The most fun. That seems the most impactful. And I might argue, well, well, well, hold on one second. Hold on. Like there are there's a lot to be said about what we can do in through the portfolio that can actually, I might argue, maybe have more transformational impact. So let's focus on grant making. That that is fun stuff. That's good stuff. That's transformational stuff. There's a lot more assets, a lot more influence, a lot more capital to be deployed for social impact sitting here. And we need to try and include more people and think differently about that work. I was gonna I was just gonna add that also I mean, so historically foundations have been set up to give five percent. Right? Like we have there's a tax, you know, we have a tax obligation to give five percent to some social good. And so historically for all foundations, that's why foundations have been created to well, it's a tax write-off, it's five percent to give to social good. So foundations have been created to focus on that, like really like the you know, like the grant making part, really. Like that's that's why we're in existence is for that five percent. And then the rest of the 95% is, you know, in some endowed an endowed investment model. ⁓ and I I d I really do think it's just like You know what George is saying, it's just like it's also the the financial system and industry has also created sort of this way of like for foundations, staff and leadership to be like, you know what, we're gonna take care of it. You guys don't have to c don't take care of you know, you guys take care of the grant making. We're investment advisors will take care of the endowment so that we could have a certain return, so you could keep doing your grant making. And I think like in the last 10, 15 years, there's been a lot more nuanced conversations about like obviously incre increasing payout. What does this endowment management mean? Actually breaking like the I I I like, you know, I think what George is saying, it's like I don't know how many conversations I've had that with leadership of foundations that know nothing about finance. Like, guess what? Your investment advisor, you you you've hired, you could fire them. That's your prerogative. Don't be so like they're really nervous because they don't know anything about finance or investments and they just want to keep it kind of going. So there's some about something around like philanthropic culture too that says, we're gonna keep that investment side in the over there. It's doing great. And let's like let's focus on the grant making because that's really about our mission. So and I think with a lot of conversations in the field. It's now, you know, it's opening up more that like actually we have to pay attention and we should be paying attention to the investment side. And even the investment field is also impact investing, right? Like it's kind of newish, right? Twenty, twenty-five years. Like so it's like more than that. You know, so it's like there's more conversations on the impacts impact investing side. Like that this is something that's important to do too. Yeah, this is great. And you know, just ⁓ I appreciate, you know, in this section, like Rainy talking about kind of like the The goals, the structure, kind of like the charge of ICs at large. And then really George chiming in here with this like a Dr. MD kind of comp of ⁓ how people maybe don't raise their hand or don't think that they can contribute because they don't have an an MD, to use the kind of analogy that George was using. But there really is a call for for people to participate and to contribute. Doesn't mean that you have to be on the committee making a vote, but there is a way that we can ⁓ exercise more enfranchisement ⁓ to to have better outcomes. I'm assuming doctors would also think that if they heard from their patients, there would be better outcomes, even though the patients are not doctors or in this case, investment professionals. I'm, you know, this is a great segue. ⁓ I'm going to bridge us into basically like, and I'm going to, you know, we're going to kind of hand it over to Rodney in terms of, ⁓ you know, what investment committees actually can do or what they actually can't do. ⁓ And then it's like how you how we think about navigating that as individuals. So the four of us are all on a variety of investment committees. ⁓ you know, I myself are on three or four of them. I think the everyone else is on two or three of them as well. So we probably have like 10 plus in three committees. Yeah, yeah. Like 10 discrete examples. ⁓ and like we're also all individuals that care about, you know, the the impact that we can have to George's point around what the portfolio can do. ⁓ so I just want to kind of like start opening that conversation around how do we how do we navigate that as individuals. Yeah, and I I appreciate you broaching that, Eric. And you know, I can sort of even just share from my vantage point, I would love to hear from Rene and George, because ⁓ I think both of you already shared like sort of how you show up ⁓ in your roles as investment committee members, which might be a bit unique, quite frankly, in in in my experience, in a good way. but you know. A lot of it from from my vantage point, Eric, is as I shared earlier, sometimes you might be the first, right? The first person that's coming in with this differentiated perspective, and you're maybe making space as George and Renee do for others to come in. And that's a different role when you're the first, right? You're you're navigating, Rene, you pointed this out, traditional perspectives being held by both the investment advisor, but also perspectively other. Of your fellow investment committee members. And then what's the role? You know, I I will say for myself, just speaking like transparently honestly, I feel a deep responsibility on that end, right? And an obligation on how do I both be a good partner to my my fellow investment committee members and also ensure that like the mission and impact that this institution has affirmed itself and and is is focusing itself on. Is achieved. And we all know that sometimes those conflict, right? They can conflict. and then there's also the the reality of this sort of ⁓ you know, Rena, you talked a lot about social justice. I think about like from my vantage point, the role is being as an organizer oftentimes, right? Like taking those skill sets that allow you to build out the relational and trust, bring that to the investment committee, you know, use those skill sets. To be able to bridge different perspectives, to you know, highlight different perspectives. I say all that to note that it's a lot of work, right? And the fact that many were all like on multiple committees. And so, yeah, I'm just curious, like, I'll start with you, George, in terms of just what are the the main things that like in your role? You know, you're like, I've got to navigate this, or you're sort of like the things that you emphasize in in your role as an investment committee member. And what are challenges? Yeah, I mean Ronnie, I think you touched on something that's really, really important. I think it's the relational piece. You know, ⁓ making sure that you're at least for me, I try to make sure that I'm making those deep investments in relationship, ⁓ so that as these mission-aligned social justice, racial justice, economic justice, gender justice, more broadly mission-aligned concepts are coming into committee. ⁓ that folks trust that I'm able to hold ⁓ all of those considerations in mind. And and Rini alluded to this, you know, we care about returns, we care about risk management, we care about disciplined, you know, portfolio construction and asset allocation. And equally, if not more importantly, we care about all of these other things. And ⁓ giving us communal permission to hold all of those things. is sort of where I put on my organizer hat. I say, hey, it's okay. We actually can do all of these things. And it's squarely in our purview to do all of those all of these things. And just getting folks comfortable withholding all of that ⁓ is is is is a value add to the investment to the investment committee work. It's funny, George, just to interject is because when Rodney and I talk about this like offline, You know, it comes back to kind of like this misnomer misconception. I think about myself, maybe like 10 or 15 years ago. If if even a friend, someone that I trusted, would be like, hey, you should look at these investment committees. I I would have probably had all the doubts that we have shared in this call already. And that would have been like, ⁓ okay, I'm my vision of this, the hour meeting or however long the meetings are, ⁓ for ICs, it's like we're gonna make these 10 very quantitative decisions and all the only skill set that I'm going to be leveraging is am I say yes or no, or are we going to pressure test this kind of financial metric? And I think it it's a huge surprise, it'd probably be a huge surprise to a lot of people to understand EQ relational piece. Use the word organizing. ⁓ this is something, you know, people talk about organizing capital and organizing money, but I think ⁓ there's kind of a misconception that like, you know, you wouldn't do organizing, like you wouldn't do relationship building for an investment. committee. So I just appreciate that a lot and I've seen that a lot in my life, ⁓ tremendously. The the other thing really quickly I would share, and I wonder if this resonates with ⁓ you, Rodney and and and Rini, ⁓ 'cause Eric and I serve together, so I I I think I know it'll resonate with him, is like is fundamentally shifting the decision making container. Like I've sat on stay with me here. I'm I'm gonna I'm gonna I'm gonna I'm gonna make this all make sense. I've sat on investment committees where we spend a lion's share of our time trying to choose between three fixed income managers that we're going to deploy capital to. And I take a step back and I go, why are we focused on these types of decisions? I want the investment committee focused on high-level strategic, impactful decisions. And so choosing between fixed income manager A or fixed income manager B may be exciting to investment committee members, may even be in our wheelhouse collectively. But is that what we should be focused on in terms of our highest and best use of stewarding? these resources. And for some committees the answer may be yes, but for most, it's probably no, right? We should be focused on strategic policy. We should be focused focusing on, you know, alignment. We should be focusing on risk management at a very, very high level, working with our investment advisor. So I think getting getting that c that right, you know, the the the the context setting And ⁓ creating a culture of focusing on the right things with a collective understanding of what the investment committee's highest and best use of its time and energy is can fundamentally shift not only what you're working on, how you're working on it, but who you can invite to sit on the investment committee. And as Rainey mentioned, it comes to that investment advisory relationship. Are you working with an investment consultant that's passively bringing you recommendations and that's where the IC is focusing its time? Or do you have another type of strategic advisory relationship where you're in, you know, you're in deep, deep partnership with your investment manager. They understand what you're trying to accomplish, and you can really set policy and strategy. Those are the more innovative, provocative, interesting conversations. And I want to sit on those investment committees because I know that I can. leverage a more expansive ⁓ I can I can access a more expansive sort of intellectual capacity and I can invite more people to participate. ⁓ very much to your point, Eric, they don't need to be making technical investment decisions, but they can inform strategy and process and policy and really drive the strategic direction and make sure there's alignment. That Is where to r to Rini's point, it's an advisory pos and a lot of times it's a voluntary position too. So like what George I think is really touching on is like you're not a staffed per you're not the investment director for this institution. So I like what George is saying around calibrating what people are best suited for, what level is it, the 30,000 foot or the 30 foot, like what level to kind of exist at? And I've seen in committees that we they they don't not everyone has that. And that leads to a lot of confusion and a lot of Yeah, just a lot of confusion. So I really appreciate the kind of calibrating the right level. And by the way, just really quick, because I w want to make sure Rini offers some insight here, but I would note too that the invitation that George offers is in terms of that higher that higher strategy, this the certain skill set and perspectives required to do that, it actually opens up space for different types of people to participate. Because all those the skills required to do that work is quite a bit different, right, than a lot of the technical pieces. Yep. I was just gonna add is that what I find interesting to have that conversation, and I'm a little bit of an IPS investment policy nerd, is that actually when you start to revise your IPS, especially through an impact lens, those large strategic conversations happen. And I think like to me, when in every investment committee, when we've gone through that revision, particularly with impact focus, It brings a committee level conversation to the strategy level, George, as you're saying. And it's actually also just like a North Star for all of the c conversations happening within your committee. ⁓ so I always find like so you have to start somewhere. Like it's like I think sort of traditional ICs are always about like, let's look at the managers and let's select. But if you're really looking through like an impact lens and an impact IPS. then that's where I feel like the most interesting conversations and learnings happen that can pull up the committee. I also always say, like, you know, and I I don't know why it surprises people, but like after the bylaws, the IPS is the second most important document for a foundation. And I think a lot of board members don't realize that either. And people just don't realize that. Like I'm like the IPS is huge. It governs like what we're doing, how we're doing it. And it really helps investment committees understand their role. and the other thing, like actually when you're developing your IPS or Impact IPS in particular, and having conversations within an investment committee, and Rodney, you said it too. I always find my role is about listening and bridging. Like I'm always listening, like listening to like what are they, what are the committee members saying? How are they thinking about this? And then how do I bridge sort of again, like how do I bridge sort of possibly like how do I help explain sort of how it what this means? What does impact mean? ⁓ what does you know asset classes mean? I mean it's so many roles like that really we play in the investment committee around like the technical side, the theoretical side, the impact side, the value side. So it's just like there's something around bridging, navigating, listening that I feel like are key like elements to be part of an investment committee that I find really important. ⁓ and then again like it is just really I see it as I've always like I I think I've joined investment committee for the first time because I'm also an organizer at heart and I'm like, I better get in there. Right. It's it's like always it's like it's always about like who's at the table. And if you're not at the table, you're not making decisions, right? Like so I I really came through that kind of mindset. Like I you know, and then how do I get others at at that table? ⁓ and I really do believe like the investment committee can have totally different types of perspectives. And not just like finance perspectives. I think it broadens the conversation again, as George you're saying, like then you get into that strategic side that's really important. ⁓ because I hate when I've been on investment committees that are really talking nitty-gritty, and I'm like, ⁓ my gosh, like what what are we doing? Like, isn't this the investment advisor's job anyway? Like, so it's just like I think pulling it up is so important, but hard to do. I'm not gonna say it's easy. I I do think the default is to go on the technical side. And I think it's really, you know, the investment chair's like ability to pull it up, but it's it's hard. I think it's harder than ⁓ you know, you wish because it's easier to go from like it's again like on the grant making side. You you know, like foundation boards should be thinking about the overall grant making strategy and not particular grant by grant. And the investment committee is the same thing. It's just like looking at the kind of, you know, big level strategy then particular and how does the investments fit in that strategy is the important and the really exciting part too. So there's a lot of really interesting things about being on a investment committee. The the other thing that I would add ⁓ that I don't want to take for granted is that the investment committee also stewards the spending policy. Yeah. It's so big. I know. So even even if you don't care about mission aligned investing or impact investing or responsible investing, but you want a Philanthropic entity to just spend more than the 5%, then come join the investment committee because we that's what we're modeling that. Well, what if we spend this and what if we increase or do what do we do this or that? Like, so if you if you want more grant-making dollars to be deployed, the investment committee stewards the spend policy. The spend policy is either a a ⁓ A complementary document to the IPS or it's embedded in the IPS. So that that is, we're looking to those policy documents to say, are there opportunities for us to spend more? How are we smoothing our spend so that we can be prudent stewards of this capital? All of how do we model out, you know, scenarios where if we spend more, what are the implications to, you know, to the endowment, you know, both in the short, intermediate, and long term? Do we have the returns to support a higher spend? We're asking those strategic questions in the investment committee meetings. You should join us. Yeah. I mean, there's so much power at the investment committee that is just so un underrecognized and misunderstood. You know, I also, and I'm I'm ⁓ segue this over to Eric, but ⁓ we gotta be clear about this. The four of us are on multiple investment committees, and by the way, we're all people of color. that is ⁓ quite unusual to have a group of people of color having this conversation, not only having the conversation, but importantly, to your point, Rini, being at the table, ⁓ and having a position of influence, organizing, bridge building, etc. So I mean, that's that I mean, in our in our last few minutes together, I wanted us to dig into that a little bit. So, Eric. Yeah, I mean, we asked you, you know, we asked you both to join us intentionally because you're you're friends and colleagues and and we appreciate your insights. But we're also, you know, we we just scratch our head. I mean, you know, Rodney and I, I'm sure the two of you as well, we just kind of scratch our heads ⁓ looking at the lack of diversity in the investment committee space. And I mean, my kind of just quick back-in-the-napkin hypothesis is that, you know, like following the logic of If a lot of ⁓ investment committee decisions or what is perceived as decisions ⁓ are very technical, ⁓ you know, the people that inhabit investment roles will then flow into them, obviously. But what we've done such a good job here and in our conversation is really expanding like that skill set of like who could contribute in at an investment committee level. And I mean, I'll just say I'm I I can't remember, it's been you know, three or four committees over the last couple of years. But for some of them, I I am the only person of color. ⁓ I that is not the same as I'm the only liberal or progressive person. ⁓ a lot of all the committees, kind of like what George said at the beginning, I I'm I am quite spoiled. Everyone is ⁓ interested in the same thing, moving in the same direction. But if we're talking about like racial diversity, which I know we're all very passionate about, ⁓ there are committees that I'm on that I am the only person of color. and ⁓ you know, people shared ⁓ colleagues or people that are looking to recruit or fill out the committees are like, where are where are the people? And I'm like, man, like, you know, if you if you're really gonna like ask me, like I have a list of 15 people that I I could tell you right now. and I talked to George about this too. It just ⁓ it goes to so I'm curious how people relate to that in their own experience. And then I want to talk about pipeline because ⁓ I tell I teach at two universities, and I specifically tell ⁓ my students, specifically my students at at CUNY, the City University of New York, ⁓ to look into investment communities. I really hope they listen to this episode. ⁓ but they will have the same misnomers or mis ⁓ misconceptions as as we've shared. I'm just going, ⁓ what even is that? I don't belong there, et cetera, et cetera. And my classes are super majority people of color as well. But how do you get these? Jobs. Like, you know, George said that he he knew me and Rainey and George have known each other for a while. what is the pipeline? So tell us a little bit about diversity and your experience. And then ⁓ how do people get these roles? What does this pipeline look like? Yeah, I I I can start. I mean, and Eric, you kind of alluded to it, right? When you begin to bring folks with different profiles onto investment committees, they just naturally and organically have different networks. So when I'm asked, Well, who else do you know? I go, Here here are all my friends who are really smart and who do this work who we should send invitations to. ⁓ so the the the the talent the the talent is is out there, you know. ⁓ I think it's up to it's and you know, Rodney spoke to this. It's our responsibility to to when we get opportunities to open doors and to extend invitations, that we do that in intentionally, and and responsibly. So I always if I get a seat at an investment committee, I say, ⁓ here are all my friends who are really smart who we should we should begin to organically build pipeline around. Right. ⁓ but I think more formally, and I've had this conversation with each of you at you know respective points in time. I think there are also structural ways we can begin begin to build pipeline ⁓ you know, with existing impact organizations. So I think about like Mission Investors Exchange, I think about all of the regional philanthropic associations. There should be a series of modules and pipeline building strategies in those ex in that existing philanthropic infrastructure. For example, you shouldn't be engaging program folks around continuing education without informing them of the power of the investments and they should be sitting on committees. They should be, you know, increasing their baseline level of understanding about what the investment committee does and the power of the endowment. I think that could be that could be helpful. So I think it's on us to support pipeline building wherever we are and sort of expand the table and pull up more seats for friends and colleagues and others that we believe could add value. But I also think it's important for us to point to existing infrastructure and say, this should be included in a continuing education. You should be including this in your pipeline building strategies, the talents there, and we can we can educate them about how to effectively participate in these investment conversations. I mean, I think only I mean, yes, didn't what George just said, it's just like I think it is I do feel like I think we all have done that well. Like we've all, you know, we are an investment committee. We're like, hey, make sure these, you know, I w this is the pipeline, these are the people. ⁓ so I think it's our responsibility to keep just like bringing people along and into these investment committees. And I think also just like on the structural part, again, it's like it's there's just not as much ⁓ and t ⁓ you know attention I would say to really strategically think about that within these types of infrastructures that George is just talking about. Like there really isn't. It's just like it's there's just not enough intentionality. And there probably needs to be a lot more intel intentionality about like how do you structure something within within like whether it's an MIE or any of the places that you know really brings together like they have an impact institute like 101. Right. Like making sure program staff is involved in that, but just like just really getting more people to think about, hey, you know, you should be able to join it. I I I but I do think it's opening doors. Like if you're currently on an investment committee and you're a person of color on investment committee, open the door for others. because I think that's really the first start of it. So I've thought about this a good amount. And we're really highlighting that a lot in this call of like skill sets, experiences. ⁓ kind of like the the potpourri of of ways you can contribute. ⁓ it is, I mean, Rodney kind of mentioned this, it is a committee, it is a group. So you actually shouldn't all be the same. You actually should have specializations and roles that you come together as an as an organism, the five or six of you, however large your group is, three, four, five people, you should bring diverse perspectives that you can all synergistically become something better as a whole committee. So I've thought a lot about credentialing. This space. And as far as I know, there is no official credential. There is no bar exam where you have to pass the bar exam to be able to practice as lawyer. I've met people from all different stripes and all different backgrounds ⁓ to join an investment committee. So I'm thinking about what it means to not have that kind of official ⁓ credential, because I think a lot of my friends or or folks of color or folks from working class backgrounds, they see college or certain ⁓ accolade as a credential that will then allow them admission into something. It does a kind of a clear as a structure, there's a path. And we're talking about this more relations and connections. So it's a little murkier. So what I want to ask everybody as we kind of close out the conversation is what is a skill or experience ⁓ that you've cultivated or maybe that you would tell your younger self to cultivate that has really equipped you quite well to either join or per or contribute. To investment committee. And for me, beyond just general like excitement and passion, I'm I think the skill that probably has served me the most on my committees is that I'm I am ⁓ insistent on contributing. Like it sounds quite basic, but I'm always asking how can I add more value? How can I contribute more? And it is never about, ⁓ well, I don't like that, or like I don't want to do that. ⁓ if I ever walk off something, it's because I'm like, I don't think I am the best fit to offer value here. So I'm always trying to contribute ⁓ in a proactive way. But I would love to hear in in our last thoughts, skill experience that served you uniquely well. There's there's incredible sort of complexity to this work, but at the end of the day, if you can like read, write, and you're nice to people and you play nice, you should be able to participate. Like I mean, Rini, think about it, right? And you you mentioned this point, right? If you can read an investment policy statement and ask questions about what each component of the policy means, you can effectively contribute. Right? Like if you can ask smart questions of the investment advisor and press them on alignment, you can contribute. You know, so if we can create the, you know, so yeah, it's a lot of it is the container in which we're sort of you know, ⁓ well allowing people to participate. I I stand by this. If you can read and you can write and you can play nice with other people, you can join any investment committee I'm a part of. I'll put you on the list. ⁓ because I'll hand you the IPS and spend policy and our bylaws and say this is in our mission and our theory of change to go, this is the mandate. If you can read it and understand it, welcome to the IC. Check that off. I can read and write. I would I was gonna say like I think one of the skills I guess I think that I I bring to an IC and I think we all actually do is ac we all have a real strong North Star around impact and what you know who's the impact for? Like I I really think like any IC member that, you know, that in all the ICs I'm in, it's just like I think it's like we're all we all joined this foundation as a board member. Because we really believe in the mission of the foundation, really doing work that is actually unlocking capital for justice. So I I I I I really I think like, and that's like just like it could, and so you could, you know, your lived experience, just the understanding like justice matters. ⁓ you could be on a nicey, really. You again, you could read and write. Hopefully, you read and write, and you could listen. But I I think that. I I don't know. I feel like it is about a bunch of people and we are all like have this kind of notion that we want to do something good in this world. And that's that's really the kind of skill that I feel like, you know, I do have a finance background, but actually what I feel like my bigger background is like I really believe in a a better and just world. And I'm on this investment committee because I want that. And I might not understand or know like all the little due diligence parts of the fund, or maybe I do, but like you don't need to know. You just need to know like, hey, I want to do better for this world. And serving on investment committee is about about that because it can bring capital for good. That's it. And and ask good questions. And that's all you need to know. Yeah, I would just say really quickly, and I everything that George and Rini have said, for me, a lot of it has to do with as you said, Arene, like I've I've had experience in private equity, venture capital, corporate strategy. And at the same time, like what I find to be the skills that I developed earlier in my career when I started in journalism, my academic, my undergrad academic training in anthropology and sociology, because so much of this is it's about people. Like investment committees are we're all people. George pointed us out. We all have biases, we all have preferences, we have all these different things. and so much of it is actually. Do you have a ability to communicate across differences and actually being in a bridge and organize? I actually think that's fundamentally important. And I think that's part of the reason, if not one of the most important reasons why I'm oftentimes recruited into investment community. George Rini, thank you for joining Ronnie and us ⁓ for this episode and just appreciate all your insights and we'll see you out there on the committees. Thank you. The opinions expressed in this program are those of the individuals interviewed and are for general informational purposes only. They are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual or on any specific security. This program is intended solely to provide education about the financial industry in the broader impact investing landscape. To determine which investments may be appropriate for you, consult your financial advisor prior to investing. Any past performance discussed during this program is no guarantee of future results. Please remember that investing involves risk and possible loss of principal capital. Please seek advice from a licensed professional before making any investment decisions. All views expressed by our guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of impacted or its hosts.