The Blog

As a parent raising children during such times of flux, I was looking for a book that would make sense of the intersection of globalization, education and parenting, and offer thoughtful, practical tools.  I didn’t find that book, so I set out to write it.  The result is Growing Up Global,” Homa explained.  Since the successful release of “Growing Up Global: Raising Children to be At Home in the World,” Homa Sabet Tavangar has been recognized as a leading voice among parents, educators, business leaders, the media and non-profit organizations in building understanding of global citizenship, its nuances and its practicalities.

Join the next Night Out With Meaning on May 9, 2013 featuring Homa Sabet Tavangar.  

 Homa Sabet Tavangar is the author of the widely-acclaimed, Random House/Ballantine Books release, Growing Up Global: Raising Children to Be At Home in the World, named a “Best New Parenting Book” by Scholastic Parent & Child magazine, and hailed by national education and business leaders and media ranging from Dr. Jane Goodall to the BBC, NBC, ABC, Washington Post.com, Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times, Boston Globe, PBS, Parents Magazine, Rodale Press, FoxNews.com, the Huffington Post and many more.  Her book is sparking initiatives across the U.S. to help audiences from CEOs to Kindergartners learn and thrive in a global context – and have fun along the way.

She has worked with organizations ranging from the World Bank and USAID to Education First (EF), PBS Parents, Sprout TV, Kidshealth.org, and was a Visiting Scholar at the University of Pennsylvania.  She is a regular contributor to the Huffington Post, PBS, Momsrising, GOOD, and various education sites, among other media, and a sought-after speaker around global citizenship, parenting, globalizing curriculum and creating inclusive working and learning environments.  She is a contributor to a new book by educator Heidi Hayes-Jacobs on new literacies, and is working on two new books.

Prior to turning her sights to global education and parenting, Homa spent 20 years working in global competitiveness, organizational, business and international development with hundreds of businesses, non-profit agencies, governments and international organizations.  Born in Iran, she also has lived in East and West Africa, South America and throughout the U.S.  She graduated Phi Beta Kappa from UCLA and holds a Master’s in Public Affairs from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.  She speaks four languages and her religious heritage includes four of the world’s major faiths.  She is married and the mother of three girls ages 9, 17 and 19, an active volunteer in her local community near Philadelphia and serves on the boards of several international organizations.

The message from Chuck Levesque, Executive Director of Depaul USA, was clear the other night. Go and tell people you see what you did last night and how it affected you. He is referencing the eight short films that are part of HOMELESS HAS A NAME film festival. The films dispel stereotypes of homelessness by showing a range of people who have experienced being homeless. These people are young, old, educated, mothers, fathers, men, women, children.

James is a college graduate, but found himself homeless after graduation while he was looking for a job. He lived in his car and took pride in his appearance. He lived in a homeless shelter for three months until he could save enough money for an apartment.

Charles is educated, articulate, charismatic and disabled. He lived on the street for many years with the help of his friend, Guy. Charles believes in America, he feels lucky to live in a country where he can speak his mind and practice his faith. He says he is the luckiest person. This film, called “Charles and Guy” is about friendship.

The film, “Fragile,” profiled a gifted pianist who was homeless after years of abuse and neglect. In the film, the woman visits her childhood home after over 20 years. She faces her demons and those events in her life that led her to become homeless. She now lives in housing provided by Project HOME and plays the piano for audiences around Philadelphia.

It is events like this film festival that show how art reaches people, how art provides a voice and how art convenes. If you tell a story people will remember it; people don’t remember statistics. If a person can identify with another person, they put a face on homelessness.

These films affected me. When I take the train to my office in Center City, I look at the faces of the people who live at Suburban Station. I look at their hands, I look at their shoes, I look at their coats. I try to imagine who they are – what their story is.

Its the next part that is tricky – how do you help, how do you make a difference, and how do you start to change the system?

Six weeks after having my third child I went to the gym. I had not been to the gym during my pregnancy and I was dreading the work it would take to get back into shape. The trainer talked a lot about strengthening my core – which was pretty much non-existent after my 9 pound bundle of joy. That was 3 years ago and I still work at strengthening my core.

Our most recent Night Out With Meaning had me thinking about core strength in a very different way!

We all have core strengths and it is a matter of going deep within to articulate those attributes about ourselves that seem to get us through life’s highs and lows.

The words I used to describe our storyteller, Linda Noble Topf are: passionate, talented, artistic, healthy, strong, humble, considerate and soulful. Linda truly inspired everyone in the room with the story of her life and her wisdom.

If you are interested in learning more about Linda’s work, I encourage you to visit her website: http://lindanobletopf.com/

Here is some great advice from the Center for Disaster Philanthropy. Regine Webster and Lori Bertman wrote a nice article summarizing what people can do to help with the clean-up efforts and aftermath.

1. Immediate Needs: There are opportunities to support vulnerable populations such as the elderly and infirm, as well as those who don’t speak English and may have greater needs when it comes to recovery. Those interested in health care may support recovery efforts for damaged medical infrastructure-but also the nonprofits that will step up to meet physical and psychological needs while infrastructure is being repaired. Consider mental health support for those still coping with losses from Hurricane Irene in 2011, or even those impacted by the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, now seeing the memorial flooded by Sandy’s waters.

2. Longer Term: It will take some time for the full range of needs to emerge. Power loss, transportation outages, and flood-damaged homes may be top of mind, but we have yet to truly understand the impact that this storm has had on people’s lives. Be patient in planning for disaster funding. Recovery will take a long time, and funding will be needed throughout.

3. Disaster Planning: Recognize that the storm may expose needs not typically seen on this scale in the United States-and this will open up possibilities for future disaster planning. Plans could be developed for the more effective distribution of food during massive power outages. In addition, as sewage and standing water covers portions of communities, the risks of disease and environmental damage increase.

4. Share Best Practices:Florida, for example, has developed stringent building codes to mitigate destruction from hurricanes. Storms are increasing in intensity due to climate change, and the hurricane threat zone also is expanding. Interested donors could help support the transfer of expertise from one region to another before the next disaster occurs. Another area for best practices research and sharing: efforts to coordinate volunteers as well as the distribution of supplies, since the storm covered such a large geographic area.
Be willing to consider long-term, multi-year commitments. Remember that New Orleans still hasn’t fully recovered from Hurricane Katrina seven years ago. New York still hasn’t fully rebuilt from damage sustained on Sept. 11, 2001.

5. Connect With Other Funders: Collaborative philanthropic response to the disaster leverages combined expertise and maximizes the value of the human, financial, and technical resources donated. The Center for Disaster Philanthropy works closely with community foundations, regional associations, funders, and responding NGOs to share trustworthy information and analysis.

The Philanthropy Column
When talking about the philanthropy landscape in Philadelphia, someone recently asked me whether there was anything truly innovative going on here in our city. B Lab, GoodCompany Ventures, Wharton’s Program for Social Impact, The Center for High Impact Philanthropy, William Penn Foundation, JOIN, PlayWorks and many other high-performing nonprofit organizations and foundations came to mind as I thought about the question.

There are over 7,000 nonprofits functioning in our region today. These organizations provide healthcare, education, creative arts, social services—and focus on a myriad of other issue areas. Some organizations are performing better than others in impact terms and quality. And some would argue that there are just too many organizations and not enough funding or leadership to go around. Every dollar donated, whether coming from an individual, an institution or the government, is a vote of confidence in the work of that organization. Every dollar needs to go to an organization with strong leadership, an organization that is mission-driven and outcomes oriented, and an organization that is changing the game.

Infrastructure needs continued investment to incubate good people with good ideas and to match those people with appropriate funding. Several individuals and foundations are changing the way they put their capital to work in support of values and mission—shifting gears towards innovation and impact. Problems do not get solved with just philanthropic capital, though. Public and private sector investment is also required.

I have been part of this edition of the Philadelphia Social Innovations Journal, curating articles that highlight the innovations happening in our city in this space of philanthropy and social enterprise. And, to answer that question quite simply, yes, there are many innovative ideas, people, organizations and collaborations, which are taking advantage of and leveraging the long history of philanthropy in Philadelphia.

Going through the process of working with the many writer contributors to this edition of the Journal, three themes clearly emerged.

There is a need to educate those with capital to move beyond just thinking about the required payout or a philanthropic grant, to also think about their investments as a way for them to increase their impact and complement their grantmaking.
There is a need to provide support to individuals—those social entrepreneurs—with good ideas. Support means incubating ideas and turning the good ideas into businesses focused on impact. There is also a need to support executive directors at traditional nonprofit organizations as they rethink their business models to ease the constant burden of raising philanthropic capital.
There is a need to make continued investments in the infrastructure to better link those with capital to those organizations, whether nonprofit or for-profit, focused on impact.

1. Educate Those With Capital To Move Beyond Traditional Grants.
Watershed Capital and Delaware Valley Grantmakers hosted a sold-out, waiting list event in Philadelphia this past spring called Sustainable Opportunities and Education (SOE), focusing on presenting real opportunities and educating Philadelphia foundations on the impact investing space. It garnered a lot of interest on the part of funders to understand the space of impact investing a bit better.

Sitting at that meeting I thought to myself, what are these foundation trustees going to do with this information? Are they going to act? Are they going to change the way they go about putting their capital to work? How will they take what they’ve learned and talk about it with their fellow trustees or even their investment management firms and program staff?

The term impact investing has been embraced by a set of investors who have aspirations to integrate their investments and philanthropy. Investing for financial return and giving for charitable return have historically been separate activities. But given the downturn in the economy, shrunken assets and the efforts of early adopters, those with fiduciary responsibility are increasingly exploring ways to align investment strategy and implementation with the mission and values of their foundations.

Impact investing requires foundations to change how they do business. The acts of investing and giving are being viewed as interrelated and as such a new framework and a new equilibrium are needed. This includes education to get board members up to speed on the opportunity; a framework to guide decision-making; a selection or discovery process to evaluate opportunities along the impact investing continuum; and tools to measure the blended value generated by these opportunities. These elements need to be incorporated into oversight best practices.

All of this has influenced what one would historically call traditional philanthropy. Some organizations are allocating a portion of their resources in this direction, like William Penn Foundation. And some are moving towards allocating one hundred percent in this direction.

We are seeing signs that leadership in some of Philadelphia’s nonprofits are taking notice of the above and are changing the way they think about their business model. They are asking themselves how they can better compete and whether there is a sustainable component to their revenue stream. If nonprofit leaders don’t have the answers to these questions then some are figuring out ways to engage funders to help them think about their business in a different way. Chuck Levesque at Depaul USA is a great example of a nonprofit executive director thinking this way. Chuck contributed an article to this edition of the Journal, which talks about what his organization has done to develop a revenue stream with the support of the Patricia Kind Foundation.

Many nonprofit leaders are also rethinking the way they capture and talk about impact. There is a movement to be more outcomes oriented versus outputs oriented. And that move towards outcomes is not just reserved for the doers; the donors are also thinking this way and Debra Kahn, the Executive Director of Delaware Valley Grantmakers wrote a thoughtful piece for the Journal about funders and impact.

However, the relationship between both social entrepreneurs and leaders of nonprofits and those with capital to invest remains at arms’ length. Those with the ideas would say that it is difficult to link up with funders/investors. Those with capital would say that it is difficult to find vetted opportunities for investment. Funders in Philadelphia have a real opportunity to push the agenda forward in our city as it relates to investing for impact. They just need the education and continued infrastructure investment to help them get there.

2. Support Individuals with Good Ideas.
Social entrepreneurship has become a global phenomenon, especially among MBA students. Wharton’s Program for Social Impact is a great example of how major universities are integrating social enterprise into the curriculum. Wharton has also partnered with The Center for High Impact Philanthropy, which has developed a research-based process aimed at enabling the flow of philanthropic capital to where it can do the most good. I wrote another article in this edition of the Journal profiling The Center. We are also seeing more and more individuals with bright ideas participate in business plan competitions and incubators like GoodCompany Ventures, based here in Philadelphia.

The Sustainable Business Network is another great example of an organization supporting those with good ideas by educating and growing a broad base of local, independent businesses and educating policymakers and the public to build a thriving economy in the Greater Philadelphia region.

GreenLight Fund, which takes a venture capital approach to philanthropy, set up shop in Philadelphia earlier this year. While some local nonprofits have commented about their approach—bringing in high-performing national nonprofit organizations to address issues important to a city and supporting them as they establish themselves in the new city—GreenLight applies its process to Philadelphia in how to address specific issues that people struggle to figure out. They fully support these organizations by providing not only capital, but also needed resources to help their local executives get started.

Several national nonprofit organizations like Playworks, Spark and YouthBuild have chosen to come to Philadelphia to set-up shop on their own. These high-performing organizations, started by inspiring individuals, have each selected Philadelphia as a place for continued expansion. Jill Vialet and Marjorie Nightingale, from Playworks, wrote a great piece for the Journal on what it has been like to scale their organization and come to Philadelphia.

3. Make Continued Investments in Infrastructure.
B Lab, based in Philadelphia, continues to grow and push forward its agenda for states to recognize Benefit Corporations (B Corps). By definition, B Corps are a new type of corporation, which uses the power of business to solve social and environmental problems. According to the organization’s website, at the time of this edition’s publication, there are now more than 600 B Corps representing over $4 billion in revenues and 60 industries (B Lab n.d.).

The Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN) continues to expand its Impact Base, a database of impact investment funds and products. IRIS (Impact Reporting and Investment Standards) continues to evolve, providing a framework for metrics to help organizations assess and report on their social performance. More for Mission and PRI Makers announced their merger to form Mission Investors Exchange in May of 2012. The Exchange is 200 members strong and includes foundations and mission investing organizations who use or are learning to use program-related and mission-related investing as a strategy to accomplish their philanthropic goals. And the U.S. Treasury Department has recently issued a proposal to provide guidance to private foundations on program-related investments through 9 examples.

Investors’ Circle Philadelphia is comprised of smart and thoughtful leaders pooling their capital in support of opportunities focused on triple bottom line. The globalislocal Fund is a Philadelphia-based partnership fund that addresses global poverty by making investments—loans and grants—in organizations that meet specific criteria. RSF Finance and Center For The Greater Good, both increasing their presence in the Greater Philadelphia area, are two funds that aim to change the way people think about putting their capital to work in support of mission.

Broadly speaking, mainstream investment management firms have not embraced this approach to investing. Some family offices, a handful of private wealth managers and other advisors have embraced the principles of impact investing. All of this is real innovation in philanthropy and something to keep an eye on as the infrastructure continues to grow.

Closing
A growing number of individuals, families, foundations and pensions believe that the assets set aside for investment should be invested in such a way that supports and complements their philanthropic work or values. There are organizations and companies in the field who are taking steps to add some infrastructure so that this investment opportunity can be more readily consumed.

There is also a population of people in this space that thinks all of this is just too complicated and outside what they believe to be philanthropy. These individuals say, just get out there, talk to people and don’t overthink or put too much pressure on the grantee organization to produce metrics and extensive outcomes-oriented reporting. They caution nonprofit leaders and social entrepreneurs from looking starry eyed at the business approach to solving social problems. They believe that there is the risk that the value provided could be diminished by the profit motive.
I am not saying that one is right over the other, but I am saying that innovation in the field of philanthropy is coming from this evolving approach of investing for impact.

References
B Lab. (n.d.). Accessed October 15, 2012, http://www.bcorporation.net/.

The globalislocal Fund is an educational and funding partnership that invests philanthropic capital in solutions to the root causes of poverty in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

I joined the partnership in September of 2010. I found out about it after reading a publication produced by Atlantic Philanthropies about “Giving While Living.” The publication profiled individuals who put philanthropy into practice in their everyday lives. One person profiled was Liz Ellers, the Founder and Managing Partner of The globalislocal Fund.

When I read that Liz was local to Philadelphia, I called her up and we talked through the model she has created for the partnership. I joined as a Partner shortly after.

The model is a hands-on, high-touch experience. The world is brought ‘into the room’ through the presentations of invited social innovators from across the globe. Typically this happens during luncheon meetings several times throughout the Program Year (September – May). In May, at the Annual Impact & Investment meeting, Partners decide together which investments will be added to the portfolio. It is a combination of grants and loans.

The globalislocal Fund is expanding and to that end the Partners are hosting information sessions to learn more about this wonderful organization.

Friday, October 12th, 11:30-1:00pm
Leslie Boris
RSVP to leslieboris@verizon.net

Wednesday, November 14th, 9:30-11:00am
Teresa Araco Rodgers
RSVP to teresa@harp-weaver.com

You can also check out the website: www.globalislocal.org

I participated in a conference call today hosted by Criterion Ventures about Women Effect Investments.  Criterion Ventures is behind the movement to inspire people to think about investing with a gender lens.  Representatives from Calvert’s WIN WIN fund and Root Capital’s Gender Inclusive Initiative both presented their products.  The idea being that education is one thing, but if those interested can’t put their money to work following this approach – then what’s the point?

Here are a couple of quick take-aways:

1.  Gender investing takes time.  Early providers of opportunities to invest with a gender lens originally underestimated the effort to create a thoughtful investment opportunity.  Developing the infrastructure, criteria, and measurements all take time.

2.  Philanthropy is needed to bridge the gap in funding…to stand behind these early initiatives so that the opportunity set can be brought to a larger audience.

3.  Providers have seen a great response to early products promoting investing with a gender lens.

4.  The good news is that learning from early product providers is being shared so that future products (and ultimately investors) can benefit from their learning.

For more information, check out Criterion Ventures, Root Capital and Calvert.

Future Weather debuted at Tribeca Film Festival over the weekend.  It is the result of six years of hard work and passion from Jenny Deller and Kristin Fairweather.  This is a special film not only because of the story it tells, but because it was written, directed and produced by women.  It is a film made by women for women.  In 2011, only 5% of films were directed by women, 4% were edited by women, 14% written by women and 25% produced by women.  Future Weather is a meaningful film featuring real, authentic female characters.

The film follows a resilient and resourceful 13-year-old girl who was abandoned by her mother.  She overcomes emotional abuse through her talent for science and passion for the environment.  Jenny and Kristin screened the film for 300 high school students last week.  Kristin shared the reactions and questions from the girls in the audience which energized them and reinforced their belief in the importance of meaningful cinematic role models for girls growing up today.

Over the past several months I have watched the journey these two women have been on.  They are smart, talented and dedicated filmmakers.  They are in need of their last bit of funding and started a kickstarter fundraising campaign.  Check it out:  http://kck.st/HnpblA 

Giving with meaning is the tag line for my company, harp-weaver LLC.  I often think about how you define the “meaning” that guides one’s personal philanthropy.  I was reading Acumen’s blog tonight.  For those of you who don’t know, Acumen believes that  entrepreneurs will ultimately find the solutions to poverty and so they fund entrepreneurs  focused on offering critical services – water, health, housing, and energy – at affordable prices to people earning less than four dollars a day.  Acumen believes the key is patient capital. They use philanthropic capital to make disciplined investments – loans or equity, not grants – that yield both financial and social returns. Any financial returns they receive are recycled into new investments.

Acumen’s blog included a quote which inspires the folks at Acumen.  This really spoke to me and I thought I would share it.  It is an exerpt from John W. Gardner’s “Personal Renewal” which he wrote in November of 1990.

“Meaning is not something you stumble across, like the answer to a riddle or the prize in a treasure hunt. Meaning is something you build into your life. You build it out of your own past, out of your affections and loyalties, out of the experience of humankind as it is passed on to you, out of your own talent and understanding, out of the things you believe in, out of the things and people you love, out of the values for which you are willing to sacrifice something. The ingredients are there. You are the only one who can put them together into that unique pattern that will be your life. Let it be a life that has dignity and meaning for you. If it does, then the particular balance of success or failure is of less account.”

On February 23rd I attended SOE Philly presented by Watershed Capital Group and Delaware Valley Grantmakers. SOE stands for Sustainable Opportunities & Education. The event is a roadshow of investors active in the impact investing space and presenters from investment management firms and funds whose aim is to make money in sustainability and social change. The half day conference was attended by over 70 people from all walks of life interested in the space.

Watershed Capital opened the event with a high level presentation on who Watershed is and the myths associated with the impact investing space. In their words, Watershed Capital advises and assists venture capital, private equity and debt funds raise capital from institutional investors; raises private equity and debt capital for operating companies; advises and executes mergers and acquisitions; and provides corporate financial advisory services. Here are the myths they see as it relates to impact investing:

1. Impact investing sacrifices financial return.
2. Impact investing while interesting won’t achieve scale.
3. Impact investing is a new field with no track record.

Antony Bugg-Levine was the morning’s keynote speaker. Bugg-Levine is the current CEO of the Nonprofit Finance Fund and author of Impact Investing. Bugg-Levine spoke about the opportunities, challenges and lessons from the impact investing space.

There is a traditional view of the world where it is believed that assets should be/are invested to make money and that social issues are addressed through charities and government. Bugg-Levine hypothesizes, “What if this world is not true?” The investment management function and the grant making function are separate worlds which do not touch. Each camp is suspect. The impact investing world asks the question, “What are all of the assets doing for impact?” What is missing largely is a truly integrated way of managing a foundation.

Bugg-Levinbe says that institutions are overcoming these challenges:
1. Leadership is taking an active role to integrate.
2. Institutions are engaging the whole body in a mind shift.
3. The best investors are collaborating.
4. Intermediaries and advisors are needed to connect institutions to deals which are related to the organization’s mission and values.

Bugg-Levine closed with the notion that impact investing is not new. Social Responsible Investing (SRI) and micro finance have been around for quite some time. What is new is the language.

The first panel featured institutions actively engaged in the space of impact investing. Laura Kind McKenna, Managing Trustee of the Patricia Kind Family Foundation, is a strong advocate for all foundations to simply get started and experiment without delay. This was supported by the other panelists who spoke of their individual experiences in the space. Kate Starr from F.B. Heron Foundation talked about her organization’s goal to move from their current 40% allocation to 100%. I think what is missing, but what is greatly needed amongst foundations (and in particular small, unstaffed foundations) are advisors who can educate, help create a framework for decision making and source and select opportunities.

The second panel featured representatives from firms managing assets to generate positive financial return and meaningful impact.

The Reinvestment Fund (TRF): TRF finances neighborhood revitalization and has invested over $1 billion in Mid-Atlantic communities since 1985. TRF provides opportunities to lend a minimum of $1,000 up to $5 million for a period of 3 to 30 years. TRF Core Loan Fund has been around since 1986 and currently has $123 million in assets. Investments include housing, supermarkets, businesses and commercial real estate to provide jobs, community facilities like charter schools and social service programs and sustainable energy projects. The Fund has the highest CARS rating of AAA +1.

SJF Ventures: SJF started out as the Sustainable Jobs Fund. The firm recently merged with Investors Circle. SJF is a growth-stage venture capital fund. The funds are 10 year limited partnerships with allocation over a 5 year period. Cash flow is distributed in years 4-10. The minimum is $250,000 for individuals and $1 million for institutions. Representative investment areas include renewable energy and efficiency, organic and healthy consumer products, digital media, and outsourced business services.

Microvest: Microvest manages a family of funds that make debt and equity investments in micro finance institutions and other low-income financial institutions. Microvest assesses the risk of the institutions making the loans. They featured their Short Duration Fund which was launched in September of 2010. They currently have $29 million invested and are seeking to raise $100 million. The fund buys debt instruments and term deposits of low-income finance institutions (LIFIs) which include microfinance institutions (MFIs).

Community Capital Management: Community Capital Management is a fixed income manager which invests in government-related sectors of the bond market. Their goal is to produce above-average, risk-adjusted returns while providing a positive impact on the community and the environment. They typically invest in single family agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS), multi-family agency MBS, Taxable municipal bonds and small business administration (SBA) pools/loans. The CRA Qualified Investment Fund focuses on supporting community development activities like affordable rental housing, home mortgages, neighborhood revitalization and environmental sustainability programs.

There are opportunities out there to get started and to experiment in this space of impact investing. But, I keep thinking about small foundations which do not have staff….how do they get started?

They don’t have staff to investigate;
They don’t have a framework to integrate;
They don’t have access to opportunities;
They don’t have measurement capabilities to monitor impact.

My thoughts also lead me to think about how impact investing can go mainstream. I think what is missing from this discussion is distribution. Mutual funds became the way for individual investors to invest because distributors could be easily compensated. Traditional distributors – Registered Investment Advisors – are largely missing from this business chain. Unless compensation to distributors is figured out, impact investing will remain within Foundations and more specifically those institutions with resources to understand it, to create the framework for decision making and to measure the impact.