 It gives me immense pleasure to introduce today's annual meeting speaker, Nancy Andrews, the CEO of the Low Income Investment Fund, or LIF. Nancy has been a force in community development almost since the beginning of the modern field, from her early domestic and international work at the Ford Foundation through a stand helping the Clinton administration get the CDFI fund off the ground to her current work at LIF. What makes Nancy and her work so important is that she's always thinking ahead and frequently at the cutting edge. The work LIF has done on childcare, charter schools, and equitable transit-oriented development has been groundbreaking. And so has Nancy's thought leadership. She was one of the first people in the field to recognize not just the importance of human capital and early childhood development, but to write about how both are intertwined with the health of both our local communities and our country. More recently, Nancy was the initiator of the What Works book, free copies of which were available out there, and we'll tell you how to get more if they're gone. I urge you to skim the book because once you start, you'll want to read the whole thing, which would be great because the themes it covers are important to everything that we do, and Nancy will talk about it further. So with special thanks from all of us at CEI to Nancy for making the trip all the way across the country from California. I give you my good friend, Nancy Andrews. It's really, thank you Ellen so much for that introduction. It's such a pleasure for me to be able to be here with you all today. I was expecting a really, really cold sort of snowy, almost scary. When you live in the Bay Area, you get a little bit, you complain if the weather goes below 50 degrees and you complain if the sun's not out. And so I was really expecting that I was kind of going way into the North country and it would be kind of challenging and maybe a little bit gloomy. And I sat on the train yesterday looking out the window and I have to say it was so magical and so beautiful to see all of the snow on the trees. I texted my partner back in San Francisco and said, I think we have to move here. But I do want to say to all of you, and you've heard the accolades that have come before me, Coastal Enterprises is one of the leaders in community development. You have the work that has been done here in Maine. The leadership that we have seen from Coastal, from Ron, from all of the staff, is something that has an influence that is truly nationwide. I spend a good bit of my time up on the hill and I swear to you that every time I bump into someone, and if I have occasion to talk about Ron or to talk about Coastal, they say, oh, Ron, he's doing the Lord's work. Coastal is just a wonderful organization. So I really want to take my hat off to the staff here at Coastal, to Ron, your integrity, your commitment to everything that we believe in, Ron, really goes beyond you. Ron and Ellen have asked me to talk about the book that was published. It's called Investing in What Works in America's Communities. I hope everybody was able to get a copy of it or at least has a visual of what that book is. It's a project of my organization working in partnership with the San Francisco Federal Reserve. Ellen Seidman was one of the co-editors along with me, David Erickson and Ian Galloway from the Fed. And my organization, the Low Income Investment Fund, was very, very honored to receive a grant from the City Foundation to help us lead and finance that project. And so as a result of that, the book is actually free. We're not trying to make money off of the book. And I think in large part because it's free, we are now into our third printing. We have 9,000 copies that have been circulated around the country. We understand that it's being taught in Harvard at MIT at Northeastern at Berkeley in California. And I just got an email last night saying it was being taught at the University of Maryland. So I think I don't know that I've ever been involved in a project that's kind of taken off in the way this book did. But it had very, very humble beginnings. The fact that it has become successful is something that surprised all of us, really, that we're working on it. It was two years in the making. It's 29 chapters and it has a very simple task. The task is to talk about the past, the present, and the future of community development. Now, you may ask yourself, why would the CEO of a national lending and community investing organization spend two years working on a book? In fact, what possessed you to even come up with such an idea? And on top of that, what gave you the hoodspot to think that you could convince three cabinet secretaries, Sebelius, Donovan, and Duncan, to jointly author a chapter on a shared vision for the future of social policy in the United States? And there's a really simple answer to that. And the answer is, I have always wanted to change the world. Even as a kid, growing up on my grandfather's farm in eastern North Carolina, I've wanted to change the world. And I remember very clearly as a really young child watching the people that worked in my granddad's fields. These were mostly women and kids working from dawn till dusk every day. They would be out there as we drove up to his house for a Sunday dinner. And at the end of the day, they would go back to very simple wooden houses that my grandfather had built for them that were just a few hundred yards from his house. Now, in the 60s, when farming changed and the fields emptied out, my cousins and I would walk over to what were now empty houses. And we wanted to get a look inside to see what it was like that people had been living in. What we found was that there was no insulation. There might be a window, maybe not. There was a wood burning stove in the center, but without insulation, the families that lived there kept warm by plastering newspapers on the bare wood walls. So we stood there, my cousins and I, reading comics and headlines from the 50s and the 40s. And what that set off in me is a slow burn. It set off something, a spirit in me that has never really gone away, because I knew that what I was seeing could not be completely right or fair. And I knew that it wasn't the best that we could do. So this book, Investing in What Works, is really the latest step in a journey that I have been on, that I think Ron has been on. Probably many of you in the room have been on for decades to create a fair deal, to create justice, to create opportunity for everyone, no matter where you were born and no matter what your circumstances. It's been now 45 years since Bobby Kennedy stood on a corner in Brooklyn announcing the creation of the Bed-Stuy Restoration Corporation, which marked the very beginning, the very first community development organization and the beginning of the community development movement. We have come a really, really long way since then. We have matured into a broad national infrastructure with organizations like Coastal, like my organization and many of our colleagues, the local initiative support corporation was mentioned earlier, in every region, every state, every city throughout the country. And we are ready, willing and able to build and to invest, to build, to create healthy, vibrant communities. In fact, my organization last year celebrated having invested its billionth dollar in community projects that are serving a million people. We have leveraged $6.6 billion in private investment, and we have created $20 million in monetized social impact. I think that is a huge track record and frankly if Greg Mayer could stand up and talk about what LISC has done and you see the numbers in front of you about what Coastal has done, that kind of track record exists in many organizations across the United States. So we have built an enormous amount over the last 45 years since Bobby Kennedy stood in Brooklyn. On top of that, we have proven that these investments work. There have been precious few capital losses over the 40-year history of what we've been doing. In fact, my organization historically has a loss rate and no investor has ever lost a dime from us, but in terms of the projects that we finance, our historic loss rate is 0.35%. That's a third of a percent. So I think what we're proving is that with the right kind of investment, with the right kind of staff commitment, with the right kind of organization and public support, we can collectively create tens of thousands of jobs, hundreds of thousands of homes that are safe for families and kids, and millions and millions of square feet of essential community services that make communities whole. But here's the trick and here's what the book is all about. We have in community development always been focused on the part of the equation that deals with physical and economic revitalization. Job one for us has been to get economies going in distressed places. It's been to create engines of growth with the idea that growth would produce opportunity for people that need it. But working alongside us and somewhat almost invisibly was a whole nother part of the great society vision. And that's what we call, many of us in community development call this the soft side. And it's represented by human development, human capital services, programs like early learning, education, nutrition, child development, job training, health services. All of those things have been somewhat separated from the agenda of people like me that have been involved in investing in communities. So there really have been two halves to our work that represent people and human development on one side and the built environment and the economic environment on the other side. Interestingly, these two halves were actually united in the original vision of the great society, but in practice and over time they began to evolve separately. So fast forward to today. What we have learned from all of the work that we've been doing over this last 40 years is there has been just a knowledge renaissance in the past 10 to 15 years that has been shedding a lot of light on the people and the place components of moving societies forward. And it's been frankly for someone like me that's involved in the community building side of things, it's been a little bit humbling because what we've learned is just how important all of that soft stuff really is. In fact, you heard a lot about this in the President's State of the Union remarks a couple of weeks ago when he talked about the importance of early education and investing in education. The President laid out his plans to invest in manufacturing, to invest in infrastructure and housing and the green economy, all with the idea of stimulating the economy and moving it forward and creating jobs. But after he made those announcements, he pivoted very quickly and what he said, and I'm quoting, he said, none of this will matter unless we equip our citizens with the skills and training to fill those jobs. And he pivoted very quickly into investments in children in early learning and in education. So on the one hand, those of us in community development are learning just how important the soft stuff, the human capital stuff is, but at the same time the people who have been working in that tradition are beginning to migrate and find their way over to us. So there's the beginnings of a convergence between these two great traditions within our social policy. Nothing evidences this quite as strongly as the jointly authored chapter by Secretary Sebelius, Donovan and Duncan. And when I say jointly authored, I mean have a visual in your mind of Kathleen Sebelius arguing over words in the text of that chapter and making sure that it literally passed muster with all three secretaries. This is a collaborative and shared vision for how we move forward in this country. So that idea of bringing these two halves together is also echoed at the beginning of our book in the foreword that is written by Federal Reserve Governor Betsy Duke. And what she said very succinctly is the people versus place debate is over and both sides have won. And fundamentally that's what this book is all about. That's the message that we are trying to get across. I believe that we are at another inflection point that will be every bit as important as the 1960s and the beginnings of the war on poverty and the great society programs that were launched at that time. And on top of that, I believe that the people in this room, coastal enterprises, local initiative support corporation, enterprise community partners, my own organization, we are part of a paradigm shift that will bring these two halves together. And we have an important leadership role to play in making that happen. Because we are the one field, the one sector that is located directly at the nexus of people and place. And indeed both sides have won. So what we are framing, if you read all, if you manage to read all of the chapters of the book and I have to tell you when I pick it up now I kind of look at it. I've read it so many times I look at it and it's kind of like your senior thesis I have to put it aside. But what we are fundamentally calling for is a framework that has four key legs. First, integrated comprehensive holistic strategies that combine human development with physical and economic development. Second, commitment to measurement, measurement of success and measurement of outcomes, particularly at the population level. Third, collaboration. I believe that collaboration is the new competition. And we are calling for collaborative networks of organizations that work together across their silos. And then the fourth leg on the stool is the idea of an entrepreneurial learning environment. One that takes a lesson from the evidence that's being created. If it gets evidence that isn't going the way we want, we need to learn how to flex and adapt and to change our strategies to fit that. So these are the four legs of the framework that we see. And we try to give, in our book we try to give a few examples of organizations that are trying to get and move in this direction. But the question I think before us is how do we break down these silos that have emerged over the last 40 years? How do we on the ground really break down what has been fairly rigid provision of support largely from the federal government into something that is more holistic and makes sense? One of the concepts in our thinking actually is the idea of what we call the quarterback. This is an organization that has broad responsibility for ensuring that impact is really happening in the places that it cares about. It's very much in line with the collective impact ideas that have been circulating a lot over the last year or so. This notion has been springing up in lots of places kind of sui generis around the country. In fact, at dinner last night I was talking with Betsy Beaman about what her new idea is and I said, boy, what you're after is you're trying to be the quarterback and that's exactly what I think we need. But I also think that there is a coordinating role for organizations like Coastal Enterprises and like the Low Income Investment Fund using capital as a carrot to try to lead us toward a master vision. And I want to give you an example of something that my organization has done over the last two years that's an evidence of this. We created two years ago something called the Bay Area Transit Oriented Development Fund and in our area transportation is really crucial because it enables people to get from here to there. It enables people to get to where the job opportunities are. So this Bay Area TOD fund is a $50 million capital pool that we created. It went from concept to a closed $50 million fund in nine months, which is record time. It is a collaborative effort that involves our partners at the local level as well as enterprise community partners and the local initiative support corporation. And our private partners were Citibank and Morgan Stanley. The idea behind this capital fund was to create equitable mixed income and walkable communities that are located in priority development areas for the extension of transportation. And as I said, that's crucial to us because we think of transit and transportation really as a job strategy, as an employment strategy. This kind of master vision and creating funds that lead us toward a master vision like that is not the kind of thing that's going to happen piecemeal. It's not going to happen with the Low Income Investment Fund just coming up with the idea and investing our own capital in it. It's not going to happen with a non-profit housing developer coming in and purchasing a single parcel of land and doing a great job of putting an affordable housing project on that land. It is very unlikely that that organization would be able to also include a healthy food retail store, a school, a health clinic, a child development center, and all of the institutions that make communities come to life. But by using capital in a creative fashion, we can make this happen. The loans from our TOD fund can be used for land banking. Anybody that's a banker in the room, when you say the word land banking, you're probably going to run screaming from the room because of the risk that that implies. But what that means is holding large parcels of land, awaiting through the development cycle so that we can ensure that all of the different components that I've just described can be included where they need to be near transportation. Now that is a huge amount of risk to take on. It's frankly too much for the private sector to do on its own. It's too much even for us to do as a community capital organization on our own. And that is where the public sector and philanthropy come in. We were extremely fortunate that very early in the planning for this TOD fund, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission came in with a $10 million commitment of risk absorbing capital. So if you think about a pyramid, their capital, their $10 million was at the base of the pyramid and they were willing to accept the first losses that might come out of projects that weren't moving forward. And frankly that was appropriate because their funding comes from a federal grant. And they were thrilled to take that kind of risk position because in their mind they were making a grant that leveraged another $40 million. So frankly they regard this as one of their great achievements and just a week ago they decided to double up and they've provided a $12 million investment for a second fund. The next layer, if you're with me on this pyramid, the next layer in the capital stack is philanthropic capital. And again that's appropriate because philanthropy has the capacity to take greater risk than my organization can take or than Ron can take. And then after that the third layer in the pyramid is our own capital. We invested $10 million into this fund of our own capital so we are also at risk. And then last but not least at the tip of the pyramid is the private capital from Morgan Stanley and Citigroup. They invested $25 million and frankly that's right also because their risk appetite is lower than all of us. So now when you put all of these pieces together what we have done is we have financially engineered a way for private capital to be used for risky land banking and for comprehensive coordinated healthy and vibrant communities at a scale that none of us could do on our own. And frankly the holistic nature of this kind of development never would have happened had it not been for this capital carrot to lead us toward it. I think of this a little bit like an orchestra. Each instrument in that capital stack is doing what it does best. We want the oboes to be oboes. We want the French horns to be French horns. We don't want them to try to be kettle drums. But we are all working from a common score. A master plan that lets us know where we're trying to go and what role each of us plays. And in this example Lyft is the conductor that keeps all of the pieces harmonizing together. But the outcome is a sound and a story that is greater than what any of us could do by ourselves. So to wrap up investing in what works for America's communities is in my judgment the best ideas that we could put together for where we see the great tradition and the great field of community development moving forward. It is calling for a new paradigm, a new way of working that depends heavily on collaboration, on using evidence as a way of measuring success and teaching us how to do our work better. And the book is calling you to be a part of a national conversation. The book is really a call to action for all of us in this room because I do believe that we are on a paradigm shift that is going to be as important as the 60s was 40 years ago or 50 years ago in this country. And I believe that organizations like Coastal Enterprises has a leading role to play. What we can see today are the broad outlines of what this paradigm shift is all about but how and what it means in practice is still to be discovered. This is an enormous opportunity for all of us but we have to step up, we have to take the reins, we have to figure out what the next steps are going forward. That will mean a lot of experimentation, a lot of trial and error but I believe when I look at many of former colleagues and friends and all of you in the room, I believe that we collectively have the vision, we have the skills, we have the talent and we have created the scale that's going to let us get this job done. So thank you very much. I think I promised to take some questions. That's right. Thank you so much Nancy. We have time for some questions. So if you have a question, Grace has some hand held mics and she'll come to you with the mic if you have a question. Nancy, if you would repeat the question so that the video can get that, that would be great. Happy to do it. Thank you very much for your talk. That was great. Thank you. I hear the debate in Washington about the debt and you know the debt has to be dealt with and that kind of stuff. And then I hear you say we're on the verge of a paradigm shift along the lines of the 60s and that sort of thing. And I wonder how you reconcile those two things or what's going on there. Yeah, it's a great question because we have never been quite as challenged as we are today in terms of resources and political will to move this agenda forward. Please just repeat that. Oh, I'm sorry. So the question was on the one hand you're talking about a paradigm shift and on the other hand there is a great debate in Washington about resources. So how do I reconcile the idea that I'm talking about a paradigm shift and a move forward with the fact that there are likely to be contracting resources. You know, I think on the one hand you can look at that and you can say, wow, that's a huge challenge because there's probably going to be less money around. I actually think of that as an opportunity to get us to lift our game because if we can demonstrate the power and the effectiveness and the impact of what we are doing, it will be much, much easier to make the case that this is good money worth investing. I think that's been one of the things that's really been missing is a lack of discipline on our part in really facing the question and describing the impact of what we're doing. And so to me, I see that as an opportunity, it's a challenge. I think it's going to push us to lift our game. But I do think that when we can do that and we will, that we will find that there will be eagerness actually to make what in effect is a public return. And we need to be talking in terms of return on the taxpayer's investment. You know, I like to say one of the things I say when I speak a lot is I say that this sector community development really grew out of the grassroots. It grew out of the hearts and the spirit and the commitment and the drive of so many people. And we have been built. We have we are a field that has been built on reversals. We have been tried. There have been many opportunities. We've had about three or four near death experiences throughout my career. And every single time we've had a reversal, we have pulled ourselves together. We've looked at what we're doing. We figured out how to do it better. We created the Community Reinvestment Act. We created the low income housing tax credit. Ron was instrumental, frankly, in leadership that led to the new markets tax credit. So in up times and in down times, we have literally figured out how to take the environment that we're in and use it to create new opportunities. And so I see the current fiscal challenges as being no different than that. And as I say, I know that the commitment, the intelligence, the capability of all of us, we've got what it takes. We just have to put our minds to it and I think we'll get it done. Other questions back here? That was great. Thank you. Those were really intriguing ideas. I'm going to run out and get your book. It's free. I'll download it. So I apologize if you cover this, but I'm really interested in the Transport Authority. Did you approach them? Did they approach you? How did that kind of come about? Yeah, you know, oftentimes there's a belief that if you could just come up with capital, you're going to solve your problems. But actually the capital side of this transportation and this holistic development around transportation had, there was a huge amount of spade work that was going on in communities around the Bay Area before we ever got to the point where we began to think about capital solutions. There were community meetings. There were the foundation world assembled something called the Great Communities Collaborative that began educating the public sector and educating others about how important this idea of coordinated development could be. And that went on for about two years and that spade work led to sort of a consensus of thinking among key stakeholders. And once that consensus of thinking was achieved, the question then became, well, how do we go about doing this? And that's when the idea of capital came in. So capital was kind of, it was a middle stage entrant, if you will, after the environment of support had been created to get this kind of work going. And the Metropolitan Transportation Commission was literally a part of that planning because they were planning priority development areas for where they were trying to figure out where do we install the next stations for our transportation network. And then the vision began to grow out of that with community input, with nonprofit input, with philanthropic input. And so based on that pedestal, we then came up with the idea of, here's a tool, here's a capital tool that can help us really make this happen. I'm sorry, I didn't repeat the question again, did I? I'll get better. It takes me a while to learn, but then I do. I'll just do it. Nancy, thank you. But I might learn to repeat the question. Nancy, thank you so much for traveling here and your speech and for the book. One question I have for you is, one thing we've all struggled with in the field is how to do the measurement piece in a really meaningful, incredible way, and to really document the continuum of impact in a comprehensive way. And I'm wondering what you see as kind of emerging in that area in this paradigm shift, documenting that and showing me. Yeah, so the question is, it's a great idea to measure impact, but once you get down to doing it, it becomes pretty complicated and it's vexing. We have done our best to take stabs at it from existing really solid research. I'll give you an example. With our early learning programs, we estimate somewhat conservatively based on a wealth of literature that's available from the University of Chicago, the University of California from a lot of different places. We know, we think empirically, what the value of early learning is to the child and also to society. And we take that literature and we use it as a proxy for estimating the monetary value of the early learning input. We do something very similar with housing and there's even new, there's new empirical information that is emerging every single day about the health benefits of affordable housing. In case you don't know this, there was an article released in the New England Journal of Medicine about two years ago that demonstrated that affordable housing in safe and good communities has a health impact that is greater than any medical intervention. It's actually a very cost efficient way of creating healthier people and healthier places. So we take, right now, what we're doing is we take information that's available in solid research and then we try to use it as a proxy to help us estimate the monetary value of the social inputs. That's the way we have started to do it but I'm sure as we begin to tackle this, because this is kind of a new problem that we've been trying to solve, I think as we tackle it what we'll find is that there are a lot of creative lines out there that are going to come up with different ways of coming at this and if we can kind of put that together we will find a way at least to tell the story. It may not be the same thing as doing a random assignment experiment project that would be acceptable for a peer reviewed journal article, but I think the point is it will give us directionally which way we're going and what's working and what's not and how to tweak the model. My period of meditation is over. But you're not done with us yet. I had a question about how race plays in the paradigm shift. By 2030 there's going to be more minorities. More minorities are going to make up the U.S. population than Caucasian Americans in the United States. And how does that play on the national level as far as developing community and how can Maine capitalize on the growing demographics to recruit, retain and capitalize on that particular population? Well, that's a huge question. I hope that I'm able to answer it, but I certainly would be happy to let Ron or Ellen or someone else take a stab at it. I mean the notion of race I think is something that is absolutely intrinsic to the work that we do. And in the chapter that I've written, one of the things that I say is that justice and economic opportunity are thoroughly entwined with one another. You can't think about poverty and remove it or isolate it from the idea of inclusiveness and human justice. I think that, of course, the changing demographics of the country I think will be offering us plenty of opportunity as we become more inclusive and more willing to recognize and lift up the talent that all Americans offer us. I'd be making it up if I tried to tell you how to apply that to Maine because I don't know your circumstances particularly well. But certainly in the great state of California, we are seeing quite a bit of economic growth and economic prosperity that's coming to us because of the diversity of the population in the state. So again, I think these are assets. These are assets because we have a more open society, a more open opportunity, and one that is focusing on economic, that cares about the idea of economic quality. Thank you for coming today. It was a great talk. I was interested in you talking about the soft side of economic development and community development and then bringing that back to, okay, now I'm distracted. But basically, do you know of some examples of community development getting involved, changes happening in health care reform? Yeah, huge topic. So the question is how is community development becoming aware of and becoming proactive around health care reform? Very important topic. I don't know that we've been particularly well organized in how we do this, but as part of health care reform, every hospital and every health care provider will now have a need. They have a requirement to figure out how to invest in the communities around them. I think this gives those of us who know that community development and investing in place is crucial to health, is crucial to human health, just as I was describing the information that came in the New England Journal of Medicine a couple of years ago. That's just the tip of the iceberg. So the health sector really has been starting to come to us saying we understand that when we see a kid with asthma and we treat that child with medicine and send them back out into an environment that has high levels of particular contents in the atmosphere, that kid is going to be back in the emergency room in two or three weeks. The medicine is just not doing the trick. It's actually, we have to be working at the systemic level. We have to be working at the neighborhood, the environmental level. And I think that is going to, in my crystal ball, five years, six years out, we are going to find that the health partners, particularly because they now have a public benefit requirement as part of the American health reform, we will be sharing agendas and we will be working much more closely together than we have been. So I think that's a very, very important question and an important opportunity. Thank you, Nancy. I enjoyed the speech. In the category of people and places, we learned yesterday that from an interview with George Mitchell who served on the advisory committee to look at reform of the government's housing finance agenda, one of the strong recommendations is the dissolution of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and in that there may be an opportunity for the CDFIs to take a look at the dissolution, disposition of those assets to have a more place-based counseling agenda coupled with redesign of mortgages that could really once and for all move the foreclosure problem in the right direction in terms of solutions. Thank you. Great comment. I echo it. There's also, you know, some of the proposals that have been on the table as part of, this is a, I should repeat the question, a question about GSE, the reform of Freddie and Fannie or the dissolution. A number of proposals have been on the table for years to take some of the proceeds from them and to create affordable housing trust funds and also to create a fund that would help leverage and support with equity the kind of work that Ron and Coastal Enterprises has been doing and so excellent comment and possibly an opportunity. I can't foresee USDA role development in Maine and so much of what you were talking about. I was relating to, about essential community facilities, but what really caught my attention was the land banking discussion, not something I've heard of before. And I wonder if you could comment on how you'd apply that to rural areas. I think you were talking largely about a city in your example. In looking at your model and writing down, you know, all those pieces I think are the place in Maine potentially. I also think that I heard you say a base of that pyramid is public grant. That's great. And that provides risk for everybody else participating. So I would just like you to comment on applying that maybe to rural areas if you would. Thank you. The question had to do with can we take the financial engineering model that I described around transportation and transport that or leverage that into a non-urban setting into a rural setting. And you know, this is something we're actually beginning to explore. We've, you know, we've done this once in the Bay Area. It worked very well. The public sector is thrilled because they're seeing so much impact and leverage for their fundamental commitment. We were able to figure out the quirks that were needed to get the private sector involved and engineer to their needs. And we are beginning to look at other locations and other cities to take this model beyond the Bay Area. Now a lot of people know that, you know, the Bay Area is a unique and weird place. And so lots of things happen there that might not be replicable in other places. And we are frankly fully cognizant that one size does not fit all. You can't just cookie cutter an example that worked in San Francisco and bring it to Maine and say the same thing will work. So I think, you know, this would be the kind of thing where if Coastal were interested in this, we might provide advisory services. We might provide helpful comments and feedback. But we would look to Ron's leadership or to local leadership to figure out how to make that puzzle fit in your local area. But I do think that the elements that's a framework that can be taken to other places, but you have to figure out what makes it work for you. We have time for one last question. And I know that Nancy will be available for a few minutes after she finishes before she moves on to another meeting. But let's have one more and take it from there. Thank you. And thank you, Nancy. Enjoy the comments. On my right in this morning, I happen to hear very, what I considered a really kind of incredible story about a small school district in Maine. It's a Coastal community that had a very low graduation rate, about 58%. And they've gotten it up to 94% in a very short period of time. And yes, mothers heard the story. And what struck me very incredibly, you talk about resources and opportunity earlier. This is what I'm going with this is this school did it without additional money with shrinking budgets. They've been denied, turned down for a federal grant to help schools get better. And in a very short period of time, it sounded like they did something extremely community-based. And they did some structuring, internally restructuring. And I'm just wondering if you've got some thoughts that might parallel to the CDFI industry. Because sometimes we hear no on the financial side and it becomes such an automatic roadblock. And there may be some other solutions to what we're trying to achieve. So the question had to do with, is the federal money always the solution? Is it really pouring more money into something or is there something about the way we organize our work and set our goals that will allow us to achieve those in education that could work very well? I just want to say that our portfolio is probably at this point 50% invested in the kind of story that you're describing. Schools that are working in a public school system that's maybe graduating 40% of their kids from high school. And that working as with private support and with private paradigm, we have seen the dial move almost consistently across the schools that we work with to graduating 90% of the kids. Now, I have to say, initially I thought, well, they're just creaming the students and that's why the numbers go up. But I've done quite a bit of visiting and digging into that and that's not happening. These are kids that are being picked by lottery. And it is a huge, I think it's a huge opportunity for those of us in community development because the lack of public support means that they need us in a way that the public sector or the public side doesn't. So I think the story that you're describing is one that's happening all over the country. We have two or three hundred million dollars in schools like that. And I think there really is something there that's worth paying attention to. So, Nancy, thank you. Will something here for me? We'll send that to you, it's very heavy. I do want to say on the land bank stuff, C.I. is actually unwittingly being involved. When you mention the capital carrot design, actually we think of real carrots because we are growing. And we are involved in agriculture. We didn't put a fish or a carrot in there. We didn't put fish in there, we do a lot of fisheries. I want to thank you very much for coming from San Francisco. I want to thank you too, Nancy. It's great to hear such an inspiring and positive message when there's a lot of negative messages in the media out there. And I think you've laid out for us a really positive future to work towards. So thank you for that.