Posts Tagged ‘SRI’

Go Midwest! Student Government Resolutions Pass at UM, Wash U, and Macalester!

Wednesday, May 12th, 2010 by Cheyenna Weber, Organizing Director

DSC00609

It’s the end of the semester and many campaigns in our movement are wrapping up with student government resolutions supporting demands for responsible and accountable investment policies at our schools. These resolutions are often the results of hours of petitioning, tabling, and teach-ins designed to educate the campus community and gain support for ethical endowment practices. Two of those resolutions come from committed REC affiliates at Washington University-St. Louis, the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor, and Macalester College.

Washington University-St. Louis students organized Washington University Students for Endowment Transparency (WUSET) last year after learning that many members of the Board of Trustees are connected (by Boards or employment) to dirty energy companies in order to give students and the campus community, not industry interests, a say in how the school’s money is invested. After months of rallying, petitioning, meeting with officials, and otherwise raising a ruckus the WUSET has successfully convinced the student government to support their efforts to bring accountability to Wash U investments, predominately by establishing a Committee on Investor Responsibility like those  in place at the top universities in the nation. The school plans to begin reviewing other responsible investment policies and develop recommendations this summer. A website about this effort is expected this month.

University of Michigan-Ann Arbor graduate and undergraduate students from Net Impact and environmental groups successfully passed a resolution supporting responsible investment practices of the endowment. That resolution focuses on developing proxy voting guidelines on environmental and social issues to add to the existing guidelines in use for governance and financial issues. If  the UM administration agrees it will be largest public university endowment voting environmental and social proxies!

Macalester College students recently passed a referendum defining socially responsible investing for their campus. They have since met with administrators who are eager to integrate students into the investment process and are open to using the guidelines students approved!  You can read the referendum here.

If your group is currently pushing a resolution, or has successfully passed one, let us know! We’d love to share the news and are happy to provide you with copies of previously submitted and passed resolutions from other schools as well. For access to those resources email organize (at) endowmentethics (dot) org.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Print this article!

L3Cs: New business structure opens up possibilities for SRI

Sunday, September 27th, 2009 by Jay Cassano, Northeast Student Organizer

written by Jay Cassano, New England Student Organizer

In April of 2008 Vermont became the first state in the country to approve the low-profit limited liability company (L3C) as a legal business structure. Throughout 2009 the L3C business entity has been growing in recognition, having been ratified by the states of Utah , Michigan , Wyoming , and Illinois . It is also currently being considered by state legislatures in North Carolina, Georgia, Oregon, North Dakota, Tennessee, Montana. In addition, the L3C structure has been ratified by the Crow Indian Nation and the Oglala Sioux Tribe. The fact that Native American communities, which are easily some of the most disenfranchised peoples in the United States, want to make use of the L3C business entity shows that it has significant potential as a vehicle for social good.

The L3C is legally very similar to a limited liability corporation (LLC). LLCs were designed to provide a flexible business structure for small businesses that would have some of the benefits of partnerships and sole proprietorships while limiting the financial risks to members of the LLC. The main difference between L3Cs and LLCs is that L3Cs streamline the process of meeting the requirements for the IRS’s Program-related Investment (PRI) regulations by being specifically structured in their legal code to already meet those regulations. PRIs are a class of investments that are generally used by private foundations in order to meet their tax exempt requirements; private foundations are required to either donate five percent of their assets to social programs or to invest five percent in socially beneficial program-related investments, which are investments that would not be made by an investor whose primary motivation was financial return.

The organization that is promoting the adoption of the L3C, Americans for Community Development , describes the L3C as “a new form of limited liability company which combines the best features of a for-profit LLC with the socially beneficial aspects of a nonprofit. It is a for-profit with a nonprofit soul.” L3Cs must include in their charter that their purpose is primarily to be socially beneficial and that earning profit is secondary to their social mission. Some anticipated uses of the L3C structure include newspapers, museums, symphonies, recreational facilities, and certain types of community development projects.

Because L3Cs are allowed to earn a profit, they are not 501(c)3 nonprofit charitable organizations. This means that they will not be attractive to individual donors looking only for tax exemption. But the strength of L3Cs is that they do not compete for these donations, but rather open up a completely underdeveloped field for institutional investors such as private foundations. Because of the complexity and investment of time involved for investors to file and process paperwork for PRIs, many private foundations do not currently make use of PRIs, preferring to meet their exempt requirement through donations to 501(c)3s. Because the L3C is designed to specifically comply with PRI regulations, foundations making PRIs in L3Cs are allowed to skip the bulk of the paperwork involved with filing a PRI. In this way L3Cs position themselves strategically between nonprofits and for-profits. Another advantage of L3Cs is that they are legally allowed to tranch investments, which enables different investors to choose different levels of risk and reward.

In the socially responsible investment movement, L3Cs are mostly useful for private foundations that would prefer to meet their exempt requirements through PRIs in order to gain a small financial return rather than donating 5% of their assets to nonprofit charities. Nevertheless, we should investigate the possibilities of utilizing L3Cs as an investment vehicle for college and university endowments. One possibility is that public universities whose state funding is supplemented with an endowment managed by a private foundation could encourage their foundation to invest in L3Cs. In addition, because L3Cs are required to serve social good but are allowed to earn a profit, they could prove to be an interesting model for providing employment in low-income communities through a for-profit community development venture. These sorts of community development L3Cs might end up serving a greater social good than many charitable nonprofits by providing meaningful employment to disenfranchised peoples. Private colleges and universities without foundations attached to them could use L3Cs as a vehicle for allocating 1% of their endowment in community investments . This would give another option for community investment besides revolving loan funds. L3Cs are still very new and are not yet widely utilized, but in the long term they could prove to be an important component of a diverse socially responsible investment portfolio.

Further reading:

You can reach Jay Cassano at: jay@endowmentethics.org

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Print this article!

Is Socially Responsible Investment a Good Business Decision?

Monday, September 14th, 2009 by Lauren Caruso, Field Organizer

Written by Greg Caplan, Student Organizer

Socially responsible investing, or SRI, is a strategy of investing that seeks to maximize financial returns just like every other investment strategy, but also attempts to maximize social good. SRI is becoming very popular recently, accounting for about eleven percent of the $25.1 Trillion of assets under management as of 2007 according to SocialFunds.com, but SRI is not a new concept. Religious institutions have engaged in SRI with their funds as well as encouraging their followers to invest responsibly for hundreds of years. Religious groups have attacked issues such as slavery and workers rights through investment decisions on a strictly moral ground.

In the 1960’s SRI began to grow with the use of negative screens. Negative screens are devices investment professionals use to restrict investment in companies that engage in various activities such as arms production, tobacco, gambling, and liquor. Negative screens have also been used in divestment campaigns, most notably to end apartheid in South Africa.

Although many people contend that negative screens and SRI is a bad financial decision because it limits the investors, recent data has begun to show that may not be the case. Many reports are emerging that show SRI funds outperforming non-SRI funds, and many investors are beginning to understand responsibility as a metric for financial success. Not only does responsibility represent a major risk to organizations due to evolving market drivers such as climate change and resource scarcity, but governmental changes also have the potential to catapult responsible companies into financial success with programs such as sustainable spending from the stimulus, corporate governance reform due to the crisis and cap and trade programs.

Since SRI is not only a moral choice, but also a financial benefit, more institutions will now hopefully recognize it as a necessity. Not only will this earn them better returns, but also make the world a better place!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Facebook
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • del.icio.us
  • TwitThis
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Live
  • Reddit
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Digg
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Print this article!