George Dyer: Thank you so much for joining today's webinar on the Power of Intersectionality

in the Endowment and the Urgency of Justice Equity Diversity and Inclusion and Racial Equity
in the Investment Process. Thank you for joining us, my name is George Dyer. I’m the Executive
Director of the Intentional Endowments Network or IEN and we're so pleased that you took the
time to join this conversation which is actually a conversation or a continuation of a conversation
that we started back in April at our annual summit with this amazing panel of investment experts
practitioners thought leaders um who I will introduce in just a minute.
But first for those of you who aren't familiar with IEN, we're a non-profit peer learning network
that supports endowments and their service providers in uh advancing mission-aligned investing
that considers environmental social and governance factors in the investment process IEN has
about 210 members in the network and if you're a guest joining us today, we encourage you to
have your organization join and really dive in with other members of the network and support
this important work. So, within the network we've got a big focus on justice equity diversity
inclusion, or Jedi and a couple of years ago our Jedi working group published a primer on racial
equity investing for endowments with a series of recommended actions and a lot of our work
since then has focused on helping our members take those actions this webinar, as a part of that,
it's actually the second in a three-part series that started last month around the Juneteenth season.
Last month's webinar focused on addressing implicit bias in the investment process and we'll
hold our next one in august with more details and the date to show to follow shortly and we
welcome ideas on topic speakers, on these areas from the network. So, please be in touch if
you've got ideas that you'd like to share and we can go to the next slide.
I also just wanted to mention that we're thrilled to recently welcome Dorien Nunez to the team
as a senior fellow with IEN. Dorien has had a long career on wall street and has been working
for years on issues related to diverse managers and other Jedi-related themes. Dorien also serves
as the co-chair of IEN's Jedi working group which we encourage you all to get involved with, if
you're not already we've also been ramping up our work to engage HBCUs in this work required
an HBCU consultant to help with that and to grow our partnerships with HBCUs. We joined the
HBC business dean's roundtable and we'll be sharing more with the network on those efforts in
the months to come.
But, overall, we're really excited to be continuing to expand our work and engagement on these
topics working with Dorien with our new director of Jedi, Paris Prince has been doing a
fantastic job on accelerating this work and with all of you so please stay in touch again if you're
not already a number please do join IEN to help us move this work forward together, let me go to
the next slide just a few housekeeping points about the webinar please use the chat for comments
or if you're having any tech issues use the q a for questions for the panelists we'll dedicate quite a
bit of time to QA. So, please start putting those questions in throughout the presentations um and
this webinar will be recorded and available to you afterward.
So, with that I’m very pleased to introduce our panel for today. We'll hear from Dorian Burton,
who's the managing partner of the southern reconstruction fund which is a social impact fund
committed to strengthening the American South by transforming communities most affected by
racial injustice and systemic inequity into beacons of health and prosperity we'll also hear from
Kunle Apampa, who is the director and head of client advisory and partnerships at Capricorn
and Habib Moudachirou, who is Co-Founder and Chief Investment Officer of V-Square
Quantitative Management and who oversees research and portfolio management there and
finally, Tamara Larsen, who is a partner in the ESG investments practice leader at Mercer, as
well as on the finance committee at the David Rockefeller Fund and Co-Chair of our Steering
Committee at The Intentional Endowments Network. So, with that I will hand it over to you
Tamara to kick us off.

Tamara Larsen: Thank you so much, George, and welcome everyone. We're so excited to
continue this discussion. Just taking a step back, so much has changed since our April discussion,
it seemed like we had so much momentum over the last two to three years, particularly around
racial equity and diversity equity and inclusion and how we approach it as a society and then also
how we as the Finance Industry approach it including within institutional portfolios, but at least
for me it feels like we've had wave after wave after wave of ESG backlash in recent months,
actually over the last year but it seems like it's accelerating. So, we'd like to begin before getting
into our panelist discussion, we'd like to take a quick pulse from our audience about you know
where you stand in implementing DEI and Jedi approaches in your portfolio. So, question poll
question one, is this a moment or a movement? So, where do you stand we have a few options
here do you have no plans to discuss it in your board and I see meetings are you at that education
phase? have you gone past the education phase and now you're setting goals and metrics are you
at the phase of tracking metrics and progress towards your goals or are you pretty much stalled
and not making progress?
I’ll give that a few minutes, so we can start tabulating the results.
All right. While we wait for those results to come in, maybe we'll start with the panelists what
are you hearing and seeing amongst your clients, okay here we are. All right. So, it looks like a
good proportion of 64 are setting goals and metrics with good almost 40 tracking progress
towards goals and not much about as many stalled, versus no plans. So, to our panelists, is this
surprising? what are your thoughts and what are you observing? Dorian, do you want to lead
off?

Dorian Burton: Sure. I’m happy to. One, thank you guys for having me. I think one of the
things that that I think we're seeing on the field and I think from our grantees to potential
investments our investees that we're- that we're looking at across deals is that, I think from
particularly on the corporate side you know you think about in the wake of George Floyd, you
saw this kind of huge explosion of DEI efforts and black lives matter statements and I think
you're coming into a space where you now are starting to those moments are starting to fade and
I think you're seeing you know this kind of constant loop that we've been stuck on domestically
and kind of this temporary moments of solidarity right where folks will come together for a
time and then go back to their lives and I think you know particularly for under-capitalized
communities mainly communities of color we get we see these temporary moments of solidarity
quite often right you know you see investments made along grant cycles or you see investments
made along or within those temporary moments but you don't see those being sustained and I
think when you look at the 200 plus billion that was committed in the wake of George Floyd by
corporate actors, you're starting to see you know what does that commitment actually mean, what
has those what have those commitments actually produce in terms of impact, what did those
companies stand to gain from those commitments, I think we have to be really truthful about
that, right, you know a lot of those commitments were actually made on debt on the side of debt.
So, it was those the companies that made those commitments stood to gain a lot from them.
I think you know we have to ask ourselves you know what and how do we kind of take those to
task and move away from these temporary moments of solidarity, when we're talking about how
we put capital on the ground to make sure we're actually investing towards equity and I think
again we've seen that across the field and this is a cycle that we've been on kind of on repeat but I
think that we definitely have to move away from but that's what I’m seeing on the ground. I think
there's a big fear from that because you do start to see that pull back and folks are worried about
where capital is going to come from and if those people are going to make good on those
promises, I'd say the last piece and I’ll stop is that you know I think a lot of folks felt like some
of the DEI strategies were more of the pr strategies and it was it an actual investment towards
equity and inclusion or was it this temporary moment that we're going to use as kind of our pr
strategy with a relatively low lift and a low investment and so, I think that there are those
questions that are floating in and around that.

Tamara Larsen: Habib, what's your view?

Habib Moudachirou: I’m getting off the mute, thank you for having us. It's a great opportunity
to have the time to unpack a lot about those questions. Yes, the poor is very telling and I’m
totally with Dorian. On the fact that there are a lot of commitments we've seen and many of
them are still aspirational, even though we think that the momentum is being lost they're still
very aspirational, and on the day-to-day what I thought this is something that I always talk about
thinking about policies versus practices.
So, we have a lot of companies out there, especially in the financial industry, but, it's
everywhere. But, here we're talking more about the investment sector. So, you see all those
commitments, and when you go to them with ideas or with solutions. We've totally made, I
mean, totally, I would say solid investment cases business investment opportunity or funds or
anything, generally, you realize that despite the commitment, the same structural barriers are still
up and you still have those barriers of size, so, you know, as I don't like to use that term
emerging manager because I like to say that I like to think that I emerged 20 years ago when I
started managing money but you know when you when you start an initiative a fund or an
investment company then you need investors and then you go see those investors and they all tell
you those companies large companies that this is great what you're doing this is really powerful
this is a great investment strategy but you are too small to get on our platform uh you are too
small to for us to be able to you we have a requirement for you to be at least and I’m not just
making this up at least one billion at least two billion and I said under management before we
can do business with you but we want to do business with you and this is where you know now I
do it more and more I try to put them in front of their contradictions and saying okay so where
you have the most chance to make impact to actually effect impact is at that stage where you
have to run for a couple of ten of millions all the way to 100 million to 200 million to 1 billion if
once I get to 1 billion 2 billion whether you invest 20 million with me or not it's not going to
really impact my business where it really impacts is to actually be part of that that ramp up to
that critical mass of assets where most investors now can start looking at you so this is where I
see a lot of the uh the kind of contradictions between the commitments and the actual what is
being really done on the field and I’m telling you that you know from uh from experience but it
does it's not really deterring you it's just harder uh because we uh ultimately we just believe that
yes it is just commitment it's just aspirational policies, of course, they track it within the
workforce and everything and we can also discuss that um workforce versus leadership uh where
you want to see uh diversity where's actually have the most impact.

Tamara Larsen: Thank you Canley, I want to draw you into this discussion.
What are your thoughts about the backlash uh how can we lean into it?

Kunle Apampa: Absolutely and um hello everyone thanks for joining today's discussion I think
I'm in agreement with the panelists holistically and I’ll be honest with the results that uh that
came up I’m not surprised based on conversations I’ve had with asset owners my guess was
exploration and education or setting goals and metrics would be majority of the answer but I’m
very glad to see that the number and track progress is actually higher as well and folks actually
feel that they're making some progress towards goals that they've said this means that folks are
moving past the exploration stage and I’ve overcome sort of the analysis paralysis that can a lot
of folks especially when they're trying to implement strategies in their portfolios.
So I’m very pleasant to see that that that goals have been said uh because this is the very crucial
first step towards making that progress of moving away from a moment to make it more of a
movement. I want to take a few minutes to share my thoughts on the backlash as you mentioned
and why it even exists in the first place because truly you know I welcome the scrutiny in this
space um let's take you to know real estate investing as a quick parallel if I communicated to an
investor interested in that space a property zip code told them that it was an SFR, which is a
single family rental with low LTV loan to value ratio 10 out of 10 investors would know exactly
what I’m talking about and I use these acronyms and jargons intentionally but if I told those
same 10 investors an ESG fund has a low carbon basket with reasonable ESG score and tangible
metrics those same 10 people would digest that information very differently. Why is that?
Taxonomy, framework, standardization, disclosures, policies ratings all of these are still not as
clearly defined in this space which in my observed opinion plays a lot into the black backlash
and the scrutiny that's happening drawing on some of those parallels from my early days in the
derivative markets the ISDA which is the international swaps and derivatives association like
developed the framework and governance that provided transparency and industry operational
structure for that market leaning into this backlash for me means a push towards industry
standardization speaking a common language well-defined language when it comes to ESG
impact and sustainability holistically quite frankly this is what excites me the most about the
future of this space when others see confusion I see an opportunity to be part of a collective that
provides a robust stable strong financial and impact framework for the ecosystem and I
encourage everyone to lean into that thought process because that's the only way we can truly
move forward and get on the same page as an industry.

Tamara Larsen: Thank you for that um one of the one of the as people were registering for this
webinar one of the questions that we got back in terms of a goal for what they would want to
hear is for us to address you know what are the barriers um to institutions implementing DEI
JEDI approaches in their portfolio. So let's take another poll from our audience um what are the
barriers to designing and implementing a DEI lens for your endowment or for your clients
endowments or institutions depending on where you stand um you know is it distracted by bigger
challenges uh lingering view that DEI LIMS will negatively impact your portfolio's performance
surprisingly enough you know I still hear that in different spaces legal pushback on having goals
embedded in the investment policy statement the governing document for endowment portfolios
um not considered part of the fiduciary duty that issue continues to come up or lack of agreement
on what the goals should actually be to Conley's points.
Tamara Larsen: All right let's look at this. It looks like lack of agreement on goals um
definitely a 45 share um distracted by bigger challenges definitely in today's environment um we
can see that um what are what are your views how can we how can we lean into this I'd love to
maybe we'll lead off with Kool-aid this time and then go around more.

Kunle Apampa: Absolutely and you know happy to share from the perspective of from
Capricorn and where I work because we've prided ourselves as being one of the largest mission
aligned investment firms in the world here we go again with taxonomy mission aligned what
does that mean mission aligned investing is just you know really aligning an organization's assets
with their institutional values and mission alignment of these assets with mission for intentional
and measurable the impact is one of the ways to walk the talk even more so when it comes to
racial equity investing one of my favorite quotes is very simple what is hard is hard meaning
these are not easy barriers to navigate and because some organizations may have figured out
what works well for them does it make these barriers easier to navigate I think there is I think
that this is where the role of outsourced CIOs or CIOs or consultants continue to play a
significant role as evidenced by the growth of these organizations over the past five years
capricorn has served as sort of these mission-aligned OCIOS for anchor portfolios which is the
sko foundation and the school family office for over 20 years and a lot of those lessons learned
and best practices from the flexibility of having a select number of clients and what are what
we've realized is in demand in today's environment with volatility volatile markets and increased
complexity holistically in esoteric asset classes um we're really opening our doors now into folks
who want to join us on those best practices but understanding that each investor's appetite is
different and particular I’d love to say that we figured it out but that is very, very far from the
truth and I’d be wary of anyone who claims that they have the Cadillac of DEI solutions
you know for us the lessons are in the journey not in the destination and we're on the journey of
the desired transformation especially as it pertains to Jedi given our strengths have historically
been in deep tech climate-focused work and so you know would love to even share you know
before before I pass this on a little bit of our talk when we come to the acronyms for the j we
believe the efforts on on and this is justice the efforts of systemic changes uh challenges society's
assumption on how things are done which is not always mainstream um investment opportunities
do provide a theory of change that could directly address institutional disenfranchisement of
women and bipolar communities on the e we believe investing in equitable communities benefits
individuals by creating opportunities for affordable homes access to health care quality schools
good paying jobs these opportunities allow individuals to invest in themselves their families
local businesses that provide goods and services that the community needs if these investments
succeed and are redeployed previously neglected communities may see reinforcing cycles of a
sense of ownership and empowerment and on the DNI like we really seek diversity inclusion
opportunities that have immediate short-term benefits for individuals who otherwise wouldn't
have had access or would have difficulty accessing key and fundamental services of capital in
our current social and economic structures and so when I say transformative impact it really
hinges upon breaking down these barriers that were previously preventing access initially on a
lighter note and I’ll just really end.

Tamara Larsen: Oh come on. I’m just going to jump in here to keep the flow going but.
Kunle Apampa: Yeah absolutely.

Tamara Larsen: You covered some of the goals but maybe a baby could talk about this
lingering view around uh DEI negatively impacting the portfolio and then the whole fiduciary
duty question which always seems to come back.

Habib Moudachirou: Yeah I think I saw 15 for uh and 15 for the part of fiduciary duty and the
negatively impact portfolio of performance it's a low number but it's not low enough and I also
would link it to the response the answer a which was distracted by bigger challenges IE
performance um there is what I would say is that first of all diversity needs context I come from
an international and global background the conversation is not the same in the us or in Europe or
in asia the way you view diversity or you reset those goals are different and um just also going
back to the esg backlash that uh was discussing a bit earlier uh that's the same thing we saw we
see more of a backlash in the U.S and when you go to Australia for instance or you go to Europe
in the Nordics there's no search backlash because this is something that is already staple's sake
um so now going back to the question there is abundance research and very serious research that
shows that and that finds that a lack of diversity is a massively opportunity to perform better so
there's a link between diversity and uh and and better performance and that's why but it has to be
done well and that's why I like to call diversity I like to rename it uh to actually drive it home as
a diversified human capital because at the end of the day this is what it is human capital is a
capital and I'm not just I'm not I'm not making this up this is really the the most important input
that you can have in the company uh to produce to produce goods and I can point you to some
research I was talking about so mckinsey that you know you may know actually they came up
with a trilogy which actually goes well with the the theme of the Jedi a trilogy about diversity it's
called delivering food diversity in 2015 already diversity matters in 2018 and diversity wins in
2022 and what they were showing basically and we've updated uh data is that on average uh
surveying 1000 global companies they showed that top quality companies from an ethnicity or
from a gender diversity point of view or standpoint outperform the companies who have less
diversity and by my 36 to by by 36 for the ethnicity and by 25 percent for gender so it's shown
and the why the the gap is even widening uh which is also something that companies are now
trying to uh to take into account Cornell same thing I came with a study where they were
actually showing that ISS which is the the proxy advisor has a comprehensive database of 230 30
000 plus directors and when they actually look at those companies more granularly they see that
the companies who have at the top at the leadership or at the board level who have a critical mass
of diverse directors whether it's gender or ethnicity tend to perform and to outperform the
companies who have less or zero and then you'll be surprised there's a lot of companies who have
zero diversity at the at the senior leadership level and CFA institute same thing so what I'd like to
leave the audience with is really it's a massively missed opportunity so it's not just a cause there's
a business uh investment faces there's a business investment case that is that is very strong and so
this actually leads me to uh the fact that yes you may be distracted by performance but your
company is actually well can deliver better performance if they implement if the company
implements diversity better but and when I say it has to be done well research also shows that
they talk about something called the trickle-down effect so it's more effective to start at the top
for many many reasons especially when you look at a diversity at a workforce level this is what I
do from a portfolio management standpoint I don't really look at the workforce level because I
know it's not very difficult today in the US to get an entry-level job in any company so whether
you look at the fedex you look at united airlines you look at any any company when you look at
the entry-level job yes there's a lot of diversity even more than you can hope but the problem is
that when as you the the e and the I and the j which is equally equity uh inclusion and uh the
justice tend to be lost as you climb the ladder the corporate ladder and uh what's the what we
start talking what research described as the trickle-down effect is that when you're very talented
candidate a very talented employee and you are an entry-level job a middle management job it's
easier for the company to retain ou if you can see yourself reflected in the top management and
this is where we go back to human capital because companies want to be able to be to attract to
retain and to be able to promote the talent and uh this is where actually the opportunity is miss
opportunities because you know we we see uh figures that I look at statistics that I look at uh
when I'm I'm making investment for food investment from my portfolios for instance I'll turn
over turnover is very expensive for companies and where does that cost go directly on the
balance sheet and I'm going to stop here because I see.

Tamara Larsen: Okay thanks for being so um you know we can apply that to the fund manager
level right so an under allocation to high-performing diverse led diverse owned fund managers is
also going to tie right back to that performance issues those barriers that we're talking about uh
Dorian I want to draw you in and get your perspective on how to lead into these barriers?

Dorian Burton: yeah I'll be I'll be quick I think one it starts on an individual level about what,
what do you actually the beliefs that you actually hold and how those carry over to your
company so um do you what do you believe about diverse populations uh do you believe that
they should have the same type of access to capital that maybe you do and your company do do
you believe in models that are promoting ownership in communities of color and around that I
think you won't really make any progress on equity and inclusion until you actually see people as
assets right uh and you see them for their assets and assets that they bring to the table when
you're talking about the DEI uh portion is DEI uh you know again something that more so
people do for a PR strategy um do you think that you're doing those diverse populations I think
the way that it's seen sometimes is that they feel like they're doing those diverse populations a
favor by hiring them when actually you're actually creating real value for your company by being
able to bring folks on so I think it has to be a shift in terms of how you think about the mindset
what you think about the assets in and around for people um I think it also is the way that we
frame uh when we're talking about diverse asset managers right um you know we've talked a
little bit about it is this this language around emerging managers right when I hear that it I hear
um an excuse to under capitalize or what people use to under capitalize those fund managers
right um you know he's been in the industry for 20 plus years at what point does he graduate
from emerging to qualified investor to be able to actually lean into uh investments and I I think
we have to be very careful about the language that we're using um because it affects what and
how we deploy capital uh and who we deploy capital to um and then I think the last piece is
INAND around you know how long companies actually think that they're going to or investment
friends think that they're going to be able to outrun the negative externalities of you know racism
and beyond right uh and I think or um you're gonna continue to be confronted with those and I
think for um a lot of individuals a lot of corporations they have the misconception that they're
going to be able to outrun these externalities for uh for a longer period of time than they actually
are uh and the need to be able to lean in on the equity piece is actually going to create the value
that they're looking for and then also being able to bring on or bring in diverse teams allows you
to find um a hidden alpha within and around communities that that helped them create equity
across across a wider platform. So I think we have to look at it um in a few different ways but I
also think you know first and foremost we have to reframe who we think and who we think
should have access to capital and what it actually means to be able to invest capital at scale into
uh into those spaces right um from novel capital strategies to beyond.

Tamara Larsen: Those are all great points I think um just wanting to reiterate that we already
have the studies that establish that diversity contributes to performance we already have the
study that the knight foundation did with the global economics group that there was no
difference in performance between diverse managers personal managers and non-diverse on
managers so there's no performance gap that explains the under allocation to diverse lead
managers and if you put it in the context of the portfolio in the market context today if you have
an under allocation to high performing managers that's going to impact your possibilities for
performance um so you know and then going back to Conley's points about uh you know how
you set your goals Dorians and Habib's points as well you think tying back what are you trying
to do what are the problems that you're trying to solve as it relates to diversity equity and
inclusion and Jedi approaches and weaving that into your approach so that you're really aligning
your implementation with your organization's values and goals and that should help to mitigate
some of the legal pushback that you sometimes experience because you're you're really
grounding it in your organization. We were talking about the knight foundation and recent
studies uh we I know we're starting to run out of time we do want to make sure we have time for
question n a um but I thought it might be interesting uh to talk about this you know the knight
foundation uh was talking about what's happening in um foundation endowment portfolios they
recently did a a study an initial study of the wealthiest the wealthiest 25 private universities and
public universities and ultimately 16 out of 50 of the colleges and universities participated in the
study which is focused on higher education endowments and they those 16 institutions
represented about 54 of the group's endowment assets and that was about 314 billion um but 34
of the 50 institutions roughly 68 percent didn't disclose their diversity statistics or any data which
made it difficult that was representing about 273 billion in assets um. So this brings this question
of transparency and how important transparency is in addressing Jedi in our industry so we have
one more poll question and we'll we'll ask this and talk about this and then maybe opening it up
um does your endowment or your client's endowment depending on where you stand um offer
transparency to the public on diverse manager representation in your portfolio. Yes or no?

Tamara Larsen: Okay oh pretty good number 56 said yes but a meaningful proportion uh said
no at 44 um before we get into this panel discussion I do want our panelists to be briefed so that
we can get it to the q a but I want to broaden the lens beyond diverse managers but also talk
about this we're going to be holistic and talking about the intersections of DEI and endowment
portfolios in our industry I think it should also include a discussion of recruiting, mentorship,
sponsorship, promotions, turnover and we've touched on some of those topics and I'm not
leaving you to speak at length but I do want you to touch on it in a more holistic way it's not just
about diverse managers it's also about who's coming through the pipeline so um interested in our
panelists uh to jump in here Dorian do you want to lead off?

Dorian Burton: Yeah I'm happy to start off I think you know one of the pieces is you know it
goes back to that statement in and around belief right um and who do you qualify as being
capable of making uh effective investments um and so I think we have to shift have to shift our
thoughts on that because if we don't uh we'll never make investments at scale and if we're trying
to actually think about uh impact or investing for impact um and you know we kind of position
how we think about value scale is going to have to be able to meet scale I think you know the
what you're talking about from the university standpoint is pretty telling um you know when
you're when you're looking at endowments from universities there's no HBCU with a with uh
with a billion dollar endowment right I think that what club's closest is Howard with about 700
million um in fact I think if you take the top 10 HBC endowments you wouldn't hit 2 billion
where you have places like duke or places like Harvard that raised 9.4 billion in their last capital
campaign and so we need to think about what investment looks like at scale and then how do we
make sure that we're pushing capital into those spaces with the belief um that this is not a riskier
investment than any other investment that I would make but that there are capable people able to
do that. I think from the foundation side and then I'll stop is you know it's not just about what
folks are doing with the five percent that they put out in terms of their grants it's what they're
actually doing with the other 95 in their endowments um and if you're really looking for total
portfolio management you're actually looking to create equity in and around those spaces for
your investment and beyond you need to bring not just five percent but you need to bring the
other 95 and bring 100 of what your capital or available capital to bear uh as you're thinking
about total portfolio management into and around those investments and so I think we have to be
more thoughtful uh about who we capitalize how w capitalize them um are we capitalizing them
at scale and then also have a deep belief that there's talent that's out there you know I think the
what we run into a lot on the philanthropic side is that you know we often reward people who tell
the worst stories the best in our communities about our communities um and then we follow with
a pretty deep under investment we use terms like pilot uh or like you know I just said around
emerging managers which is you know code language for we are about to under capitalize this
initiative and probably be very fickle in the future around how we invested in the future. So we
have to be very thoughtful about the language and then we also have to be very thoughtful about
the size and the scale of the investment that we make uh and who we're making into and we
deem capable of managing that investmen.

Tamara Larsen: Thank you. Kunle, how are your clients responding on transparency on with
the public on diversity in their portfolios?

Kunle Apampa: Right. um sorry I get super passionate about the work ahead so I'll keep my
response here up to under 60 seconds um I'd really just sort of end up saying you cannot improve
what you don't measure and in my opinion this is what sets ESG and impact investing apart the
ability to take on the obligation not just to measure the financial performance but to also quantify
the impact your capital has made and is super important and so I am definitely a team
transparency and there are a lot of clients that I talk to that definitely now I'll just end with to
support what Dorian has said um a quote from Melinda gates in the chat with David letterman if
we can connect over our humanity and we see that in one another we want the same things then
we start to help think about solutions or bring resources in or knowledge to help people lift
themselves up we all have to make that contribution and so I would just end on that note that
transparency is very important for us to be able to move the work ahead.

Habib Moudachirou: I almost cannot add anything to what has been said already. You know
the poor responses and uh what you said before Tamara makes me just think that you know it's
easier to be transparent on things that you are proud of and this is why we're getting uh non-
disclosures and so it's not just on uh on DEI it's also a lot of other things so there's a lot of work
that needs to be done and you know to go in the same direction as Dorien under capitalization
and all those problems I mentioned earlier emerging manager now is kind of um put in a pigeon
hole and it's also equates to a diverse manager and really some examples I'd like to share is that
when you are a woman or when you are a person of color and you spin off your company to start
a new firm uh you are easily referred to as an emerging manager and that when it's not the case
when you're part of the majority you are referred to a spin-off and just that element of language
is very important and that's why you know all those allies people we're talking to that are part of
majority because just like when they say there are we have to connect all of them my work really
focuses on showing them the value to show them that it's more than a cause that it's an
investment basis and yes so we are all in this in this together and uh and people who actually are
able to see and start doing the work uh and lead on the work are going to be the winners of
tomorrow.

Tamara Larsen: Excellent uh George I think you're scrolling through the chat box to see what
we're getting in terms of questions from our audience.
George Dyer: Yes. So, thank you all for that great conversation we've got a couple of good
questions and just a reminder for folks to put more questions in the QA and one was just around
a request to share the citations of the studies that we've mentioned so we can certainly circulate
those uh to all the participants after the webinar um and then we've got a great question here
from a university trustee who says making the case for Jedi reminds me of the early days of
making the case for ESG beyond research supporting how Jedi can positively impact returns
while being while uh being the equitable path what quantifiable metrics can be implemented into
a public university's IPS? What specific goals can we set for our OCIO that they can then track.

Tamara Larsen: Maybe I'll jump in here I think one of the interesting ways is to track it in
terms of the percentage of your assets um what are you know we can break it up as we're talking
about let's take a more holistic lens we could break it up in terms of diverse own managers where
you see um diverse leadership and key decision making roles for portfolios where you see more
progress in transitioning talented young people of color moving through those ranks as we were
saying earlier like are you seeing that progression into senior executive leadership roles also
thinking about to what extent your capital is going to fund founders that are diverse or products
and services that are that are targeting diverse communities. There's a lot of different ways you
could tease out what resonates with your organization in terms of your goals and then structure
metrics around that that track it a lot of times you can just start to track it um as part of your IPS
as opposed to setting goals if that's something that you're getting a lot of pushback on begin with
the tracking of it and then and then that institutionalizes that as part of your process and then start
talking about well how can we increase from where we are um so anyway I'll open it up to our
other panelists to talk about metrics as well.

Dorian Burton: I would say one of the other things is to make sure that it is one of the core
elements of your institution right and that it doesn't just sit into the investment realm but it also
speaks to your academic goals, it also speaks to your community goals, it also speaks to your
research goals um that we're thinking about our investments not in isolation from the other things
that we're supposed to produce right uh and I think that brings it the when you're talking about
your IBS it brings it into a greater alignment um for what you're trying to do and so as you're
looking at even from investments that are community-based investments you know from a real
estate perspective on right I know a lot of our uh universities are also some of our biggest real
estate owners right what is then how does that look like in terms of what you're investing in
goals and what kind of returns are you're actually looking to see that fall across um the
environmental and the social and the governance spectrum uh across the board and so I think it
has to it can't just live in the investment piece it has to be brought part of and embedded in part
of your broader strategy um because uh again it goes into what's quantifiable but also what is the
right thing to do right and you can when you have to be able to bring those two things into
alignment and the right thing to do as being the foundational piece for what and how you think
about your investments anyways

Tamara Larsen: Other questions George?

George Dyer: Yeah there are a couple I just want to add I think that's a great point Dorian and
um you know many universities do have chief diversity officers and I think maybe inviting them
in to you know talk to the investment committees look at what types of goals and metrics they're
tracking on the institutional level there might be some good insights for that kind of alignment
there and um this is something actually Paris prince our director of Jedi um is going to be diving
into more is actually connecting with the association of diversity officers and really you know
helping to kind of build that alignment across the institution on some of these topics so I think
that's a great point and just before going to the next question Tamara I'm just curious too I think
your point is great about the types of metrics and there are many is there sort of a sweet spot
you'd recommend on how many metrics might be appropriate because there are so many aspects
to this um is there a point when too many metrics become overwhelming or how should trustees
think about that.

Tamara Larsen: Yeah I mean I think there's different ways you can approach it right because
there are providers in the market that can provide you with a full report that can cover a full suite
a number of metrics and then you can kind of zero in on the ones on a kind of customized basis
that you're really going to focus on that to Dorian's point really align with your mission and your
efforts your values as an organization your history as an organization how does this align with
who you are and really zero in on those metrics in your in your IPS but still have access to a
broader set of metrics that are being tracked over time so that that's one more flexible way to
approach it so that you're not trying to do everything and expanding your IPS document um you
know so much that you can kind of lose focus. So I think a very focused customized approach
um helps you to really resonate and draw in other key stakeholders within your organization and
outside of it too.

Kunle Apampa: I'm just going to tag in a comment very quickly which is just to really
encapsulate what Tamar had said I think you should think of it more as outcome focused rather
than output focused right and when you have that perspective it makes it a little more defined it's
not the quantity of metrics that you're tracking but the actual number and quantum qualification
of what it is that you're tracking that actually brings substance to what you're looking at.

Habib Moudachirou: And one thing I would add uh it goes to the outcome uh the focus on the
outcome as well you know I sit on investment committees of OCIOS and advising them and
most times they also have those values that they say oh we really commit to the idea and I this is
what we want to do and it's easy to challenge them and say okay maybe you're doing it also
you're looking at your personal and you're diversifying but how are you investing how are you
making your dollar work and then you look at the selection of managers and they just default to
the big ones they default to blackboard to uh to vanguard and that's it and I'm telling them I just
challenge them because I have no I have nothing to gain out I just tell them you know are you
aware that there's a lot of other managers that are out there and not many not as many as um as
the blackrocks and uh and other managers but a lot of them that are diverse own that is that are
doing great work that you have to find that that are easy to find and that you have also to put in
the process and uh and see how they measure versus uh those big managers and we're not asking
to put all your or your investment in one but at least diversify also your investment based on that
thing and you will be surprised how many are really taken aback by that because they don't they
don't stay they really default because for them is a safer is a safer way of doing it if they're over
performed it's great they made a great choice if they're underperformed wait they actually pick
blackrock which is one of the business but we know a lot of managers that uh actually uh that
perform better or perform equally and the database are available and it's very easy to uh to find
them.

George Dyer: Great, great thank you so we've got another question here that's maybe not as
directly investment related but um around fundraising that asks are you any of you aware of any
endowments or foundations that have done fundraising for dedicated Jedi investment strategies
so sort of leveraging that commitment to Jedi and investment process to help raise money.

Tamara Larsen: I'm not aware of anywhere they're acting in a role where they're formally
helping to directly help raise money but what we do see is that oftentimes those that are very
interested in being catalytic and addressing this issue of how do I get to 100 million if no one
will invest with me until I get to that point um that circular process that they'll say look we are
willing to be an investor early on and we will allow you to share our name as you fundraise and
we are willing to be an active reference for you as you fundraise about why we are committed to
why we are willing to make a commitment to your fund what we think the investment case is and
why we're so excited about that and that can be very powerful and catalytic in terms of helping to
address that dynamic is like I can't get to 100 million if no one will take that first step um and so
we're seeing more of that type of activity um amongst investors.

Kunle Apampa: I'll maybe answer the question a little differently um foundations I know that
are moving to sort of that 100 mission alignment across the entire corpus the Mc knight
foundation Nathan commons foundation here in foundation school foundation just to name a
few.
George Dyer: Great, great thank you um so we've got another one here in the chat around asking
about if they're benchmarks of the results of purpose or diversity driven actual investments
versus from the diversity of the asset manager that you can share

Tamara Larsen: I want to make sure we understand that question

Habib Moudachirou: Yeah I'm not sure to get it.

George Dyer: Yeah so I'm just reading it through here too but um so I guess benchmarks are the
results of you know investing in.

Tamara Larsen: Oh okay where the strategy is focused on diversity or sustainability relative to
the profile of the manager, yes. Not that I'm aware of I mean certainly there are um you know
benchmarks that you know kind of track or aggregations of performance of sustainable funds and
things like that we're not we don't yet have a lot of case studies I think um that cover a whole
market cycle but I'm curious if the other panelists are aware of any that could show kind of how
a foundation that has been very explicit and intentional around it um how that has performed
over a full market cycle we certainly are seeing more to that point of transparency about um
endowment portfolios that have diverse managers or have a diverse manager approach and how
they're doing but in terms of benchmarks I haven't I'm not aware of any but I'm interested maybe
help you can weigh in here.

Habib Moudachirou: Yes I can I can take that question because I surveyed the markets for
years and years looking further for that answer so there are many of them uh I would say a
handful and I would say we don't I mean the way we view investing uh is not necessarily aligned
with uh how those benchmarks are constructed but there's a very good one that uh that we liked
that has been that is being published by ISS ESG, ISS ESG is the is the quantitative research arm
of the proxy advisor institutional shareholders it's called the ISS ESG U.S diversity index and
that index has been around for many years now and if you go it's just a U.S all-cap domestic and
what they're doing they're selecting companies that are displaying uh that where you can track
that have at least 35 percent of board members that are diverse that are women and 25 percent of
board members that are from the minority from the ethnic minority and uh they have I think they
picked that 35 as a critical mass because research also shows that when it's below that you cannot
really have any effect on the around the ball table and they also look at that at the annual level
which is the non-executive officer so think about CEO CFO or the c street level and senior
leadership management so the bottom line is that when you look at that strategy that index is
very easily fine foundable I can share with you the ticker uh in terms of uh performance it's
outperformed the Russo 3000 it outperformed the SP500 by almost two percent every single year
since 2017 and last year by 800 basis points uh if my memory serves me well. So you know it's
not only that's why that's what I was I was saying a bit earlier uh we you're not just doing that for
the sake of doing it where all those research that are showing that it shows value when we go to
webinars to seminars to conferences where you see all those charts they actually you have
actually strategies that are implementing them uh the right way I would say and the investment
cases is proved is proven uh because you're outperforming and you're not giving up anything
because the tracking error if those indexes are rather low and uh you still have your domestic U.S
investment. So this is what we tell those you know foundations or institutions who actually want
to do it you can still do it and not have not be under the impression that you're giving up
something on the table which is usually what people have a hard time to uh to get out of the back
of them of their mind and sometimes I always joke that it would be easier for me to get grants
than to get investment investment money.
Dorian Burton: No I think that's absolutely true I think you can where folks can go to put their
grant dollars versus where they put their investment dollars that there's completely different hats
I think that people put on I have a question I think into the space or maybe it's a comment that
um the other panelists can react to I think that we have to be really careful about where and how
we're talking about benchmarking against a different set of values right are we are we
benchmarking and almost creating a different set of diligence a different set of um tracking a
different level of scrutiny um for diverse managers than we are for uh for um uh managers or
majority type managers and so you know what have you guys experienced in and around that
space because I think that that is we have to just be really careful about what and how we think
about almost kind of creating a secondary criteria for our diverse managers versus we're looking
at the value as a whole and maybe we need to redefine how we think about value versus you
know who we think about or how we define who who's investing our capital so just reactions
from the panel on that.

Tamara Larsen: Yeah I mean I would say in my pro bono work um as a finance committee
member for a few foundations we've had conversations about benchmarking and aggregating
performance that in a way that's not apples and apples where you're saying okay well all these
managers are diverse but should we really be comparing the performance of a diverse owned
private equity manager relative to a public markets manager and you know would we do that um
in that way specific way with a conventional portfolio so how can we map how we're
approaching our diverse manager approach in a way that's fair and is it is more reflective of how
we do it in the conventional space as well so just really being thoughtful about how we approach
it from a technical perspective so we're not you know designing the question in a way that
doesn't really make sense.
Kunle Apampa: I think on Jedi topics it's not a one-size-fit-all so I lean more on the best
practices efforts than the benchmarking effort um and so that's what how well I really leave it in
that there is still an opportunity for institutions and entities to come out with their best practices
and what works well for them but I wouldn't say that they need to be help everyone else needs to
be held to that standard to be able to achieve those same type of results for whatever they're
looking at in terms of strategy.

Tamara Larsen: Looks like we're running short on time I'm really excited to have this follow-
up conversation I'll hand it off to George to uh to wrap things up.

George Dyer: Yes well um we got to almost all the questions there's a couple more good ones so
maybe we can um share some thoughts from the panel in our follow-up email where we'll also
share some of those studies some of the other um resources referenced in this conversation um
but I just want to give a huge thanks again to our panelists and Tamara for you for moderating a
great conversation um again this is part of an ongoing series so please do uh keep an eye out for
um upcoming conversations we've actually got our next webinar coming up later this month
focused on decarbonization and our climate work and then as I mentioned we'll have the third in
this series for the summer in august around Jedi themes um and that will is a theme that will
obviously continue to go deeper on within the network so thank you all again for your time and
for joining us today please do be in touch if you've got ideas or feedback for us on this program
and the network itself have a great day we'll be in touch soon.