 So thank you. Right, so five minutes late, but we're now starting. Thank you everyone for joining us. Good morning, good afternoon, good evening to you wherever you are. Welcome to our panel on capitalistic capital at the tipping point. And we'll be using this time today to talk about why capitalistic capital, why now, and what we can do to about this field. And for that, you've already heard a little bit more of the panel than to me, but we had a great panel today. Adam Connicka, the Rockefeller Foundation, Chris Juergens from the Media Network, and Ernie Singulka from MacArthur Foundation. And together these philanthropy have established the Capitalistic Capital Consortium, or C3 as we call it, an investment learning and market development initiative that's been launched to encourage greater use of capitalistic capital and greater impact from that use. In recent months, C3 has announced some exciting investments in the US, Latin America, Africa and beyond. More information if you need it can be found on the MacArthur website. And I think we could, we'll post some of these links in the chat if we go along. So just last Friday, C3 launched its grant making program based at New Venture Fund, which will focus on the learning and market development side things and we'll be speaking to this more as we go through the discussion today. I will add that my colleagues and I that have been really honored to have been working with the C3 partners to get some of these things going. And it's been a privilege to help do something which is so important to not just impact investing but actually to shaping the kind of world that we want and that we need. So I'll start with defining capital, so we're all going into this on the same page. I'll start with the textbook definitions that really smart colleagues have spent a lot of time working on thinking about so I think that's always the safest place to start and then I'll give you some of my own thoughts about what it means. And so the definition comes from a report that came from Piedline and the MacArthur Foundation last year. I'm defining capital as capital that expect disproportionate risk and or concessional return to generate positive impact and enable third party investment that otherwise would not be possible. And I also like the way that our colleague Deborah Short and MacArthur described it, but it is the but for capital that makes high impact transaction possible. It bridges gaps by being more patient, low return, more risk tolerant or just unconventional in in some way. The characteristics of catalytic capital, but I think what we all really want to know is why, why is it important? Why would you do that? And it's important because flexing the financial expectation essentially allows capital to push harder into many more impact areas and usually into the places where it's most physically needed, like hard to reach populations and geographies, innovative solutions and models that don't exist yet. Situations with small transaction sizes or high transaction costs. Right, so many of us will recognize that many of the areas with the greatest impact potential and the greatest need have these characteristics. So essentially what we would like it enables us to do is to be more ambitious about impact. And essentially that we can go further in shaping a world that is that is truly export and available. And I'm sure that's what we're all here for today. But I also want to add that this is not just about accepting concessions, it's not just about these technical pieces. I think it's actually about a mindset shift. I think it's saying let's start with what is broken out there, deeply broken in many cases and the solutions that are already there or being developed to help fix those problems. Let's understand what those solutions need to be as powerful as they can be and strive to provide them with what they need in the way that they need it and adjusting our approach and expectations as needed. So that to me is really, I think in a nutshell, both the letter and the spirit of capital. So with that, let me turn to my panel with essentially the same question. You know, what is capital capital? Why is it important? And I might use as a as an organizing framework, something that is described in the pipeline reports about the three roles of capital capital. And to you, Chris, I might turn to you for the first role, which is about feeding, which the report describes as essentially the work of pioneering new models and market, proving them out before, before others are ready to come in. So Chris, I'd love to hear about how this is paid out in the work and media network. Hi, and thanks everyone for joining. It's good to see some familiar names and friends on this call and some other catalytic capital leaders from the field. Hi, first of all, just just echo your characterization upfront and a media network is so passionate about driving more catalytic capital impact investing because we think it's essential for the read field to to reach its full potential and essential in this moment where we're living in particular. We've framed up this but for nature for for reaching the populations that are hardest to reach the places that are hard to reach the innovations that need the most patients to come to fruition. And then this notion of the context of seeding new innovations, scaling those that have promise and helping that scale pathway accelerate and sustaining things that need permanent catalytic capital in order to achieve the full depth of impact. So that's the three pieces of that that timeline framework you mentioned, maybe our network has operated as an early stage venture capital so our deployment of catalytic capital and why it's been so important to our mission has been that seeding context, we do innovations at the enterprise level, but seeding new markets impact markets that have the potential to scale and that the potential for catalytic capital and not just seed an enterprise and a solution but to build a market has been fundamental to our thesis. So for example, we were early investors way back in the day in and delight and off grid electric in the off grid energy space before these were well built up markets that they are today. We saw the potential not only for those individual innovations around households or lantern and household rooftop solar systems, but the ability to catalyze a new market for off grid solutions for those that live beyond, beyond the grid. So we've seen it be important at that context that that notion of market level impact is core. And I think a second context is really building out impact markets in those niche markets where mainstream capital isn't going. Or aren't just prominent on the global stage. So for example, we've been one of the few impact investors that have focused on property rights as an impact area and helping individuals household secure property rights as a foundation of their economic well being and looking for profit solutions in that space. So we invested in a company called studio in Columbia that provides affordable property formalization services to families, a very unproven business model that's trying to make this a profitable enterprise. We saw that as high risk but high impact potential. We are a philanthropy. And so we have the ability to take that risk for impact purposes and see our role as seeding innovations, acknowledging they may wildly succeed or fail but been paving the way for others to come in and after us so that's the main context and which we've seen it critical is that that seeding context. And so that's why I turned to my colleagues for some of the other deployments. Right. Thank you, Chris. And I love that you've mentioned both sectors that we've already heard about because they've been built out like off speed energy and some that we haven't heard about yet, because you're still building about my property rights. Thank you. Well, to turn to the second role of kind of capital, which is really about scaling scaling expanding model and really sort of bringing in also this element of external capital, conventional capital to help scale them. Can I turn to you Adam and ask you to speak about that second role of capital from from Europe. Yeah, absolutely. I mean one thing I would just say as I go into this is, you know, the foundations tend to play in all three areas in different in different programs right these are three tools that we use in all instances to get the focus to the failing for a minute because I think that's really critical. You know, often you're really good at launching things and then we're not so good at seeing them through when they can work towards maturity and really hanging their own and so, you know, we've looked at this in a number of different ways how do we actually take some of our capital or or some of the success we're seeing in the field and how do we move them forward and how can our capital still be helpful in that part of the process. And then there's lots of examples I could give on this front as to what we do maybe I'll just point you a few one is, you know, we're actually involved in invested into the latest week on fun, for example, and they've gotten to a point where they can take their chunks of capital. And the investment we made in this instance was to help them, if you will, get over some of the risks that that are associated with the types of capital they're trying to take in so they wanted, you know, open basically involved and open is a fantastic partner and a great check, you know, large checks, but has limitations on how it fits into a capital stock, and those limitations can be very problematic for the other investors to see alongside them open can't take equity like the other ones can. And so they have to have, you know, specific protections in place and so, you know, we sort of designed and targeted our investment, we've helped pay for an insurance premium that would cover some of those protections specifically right in the event that that is called, which is very unlikely. But what I want to point out there is, you know, as we think about scaling now it's really about limiting the scope of the catalytic capital so that it's not covering everything right we didn't go in with a first loss tranche so that we were juicing returns for others we went in and specifically said what is the risk that happens at the next phase that we can start to help them overcome right so that in the future they're able to continue to take in larger and larger steps out inadvertently setting an expectation that you know we're going to create credit enhance positions and that's the only way for these funds to move forward for being very thoughtful about that process. Maybe going back to Chris's point on off good energy I mean Rockefeller has also worked for a very long time in the renewable energy space in the micro grid mini grid space and energy access space. And you know that's an area where I would say this is one where, as we think about the scaling challenges that occur and the reason why we still get involved and why we put ourselves into blended structures and things like that is, you know, part of this is it goes well above and beyond the mobilization of capital right so in that effort it's not so much that we need more capital we do. But it's also that the market's going to take time in terms of building to assist a sufficient scale and robustness to be able to operate right, you have to begin to pull through certain technologies you have to begin to show demand at a certain level. And you have to be able to integrate you know, basically the energy access component the renewal arm sorry the distributed decentralized energy into the national electrification plans. And those are things that don't just happen on their own and so for us it's a little bit of like, how do you kickstart, you know, a certain impacts position in another space so that it can scale along with the efforts that are already in place the 10s of billions that actually go into, you know, building up bridge around the world so. Again, that's why you know we see ourselves putting in a lot of blended capital into spaces like that because it's more about proving that the demand is there pulling that demand through into a market that we think is ready to take these things on at more scale. So, again, you know, my point here would be that there's lots and lots of examples where I think, you know, foundations like ourselves need to go deeper on the scaling side, I think we could probably, you know, surface hundreds of these for you today and just like, this is where things tend to get sort of either over thought and or over simplified or they tend to be, you know, left behind and I really think scaling is a critical component of this of what we use catalytic capital for. Thank you, Adam, and thank you all for speaking to the connection between catalytic capital and blended finance, which I know the terms already been, you know, coming up in the chat, so thank you. Jeremy, if I could turn to you now to speak to the third role, especially a capital capital, which is around the same thing. And I think, you know, this has been described as supporting such a supporting model that needs some sort of ongoing subsidy of an ongoing commercial return profile. Could you speak to that please. Sure. Thank you. Very glad to be here and a big welcome to all our attendees at the Spanner. I think you've touched on sort of the critical role we see for catalytic capital and one of the elements is in bringing in investors who can join simultaneously or subsequently. I'll talk a little bit about the sustaining role in the context of MacArthur's work but CDFIs as many of you know the Foundation has been providing support to CDFIs for several decades now I think the total amount that has been provided and loans and grants is in excess of about 215 million over the course of several years. And there are two sort of roles here one of them is indeed assisting in one one of them is sort of just in seeding the sector in the very early days along with Ford and others MacArthur took a lead in actually providing initial loans and grants to the early and older CDFIs thereby demonstrating that they were credit worthy and providing room for other finance providers to come in down the road. And then on the sort of sustaining piece as I'm sure many of you are aware of CDFIs have a nonprofit structure which means that they need essentially rely on mostly grand financing or their own reserves in order to be able to create the equity equivalent for being able to raise more debt or loans from third parties and you know foundations have over the years been able to provide this kind of the capital and grants also providing loans that are typically subordinate longer term lower interest rates all of which help CDFIs to then build up that additional reserve they can from their higher net interest margins also allow them I think to bring in more senior debt from more conventional financial and just two specific examples which will help you see these roles more clearly one is the New York City acquisition fund that was set up I think 2006 this was a blended structure there were private philanthropic and public actors in it and about I think 40 million in credit enhancement guaranteed loans from a host of financial institutions that amounted to 250 million and what this money did was it provided a stage financing for real estate developers that were focused on affordable housing that had typically a nonprofit structure and were unable to raise financing when this other opportunities come up for acquisition of new of existing properties before permanent financing could be arranged so that particular gap was noted to be very specific and growing at the point in time when this was set up and over the course of the years this fund has been able to lend about I think 415 million in financing to these real estate developers so that's an example of something where there was a particular need that the market was not being able to fill because it did not make a commercial sense. The second example of sort of sustained support I would give is with self help which many of you know from it's a it's a very large CDFI today it was started in 1980 and it focus it focuses on particular communities that have been excluded from creating wealth through either home or business or home or business ownership and over the course of many years Makatha has provided several loans and grants exceeding but I think I would say 45 million or so and you know self have today has is serving I think of individuals and hundreds of thousands of 150 thousands the number had gotten and has provided over 7 billion in financing to households and communities. So this is sort of a demonstration of how providing that sustaining support to a very critical sector can go a very long way in creating the impact and the change we want to see. Great thank you Jeremy and and I think that also underscores an important point which is that actually in a given sector of the time Catholic capital can play multiple roles which is something we should have said up front but thank you for describing that. So I might now turn to you know probably the crux of the topic that in our title today which is that is that the tipping point you know why why now for Catholic capital why what do we mean by being at a tipping point. And for that question I might turn to you Chris, you personally and and a media network have been in this impact investing field for a long time. And Owen's been a real leader in Catholic capital what's what's different about this moment that we're in that. Thanks Harvey. I think that's a question. Everyone on this call has been wrestling with every day of 2020. I think we've been doing a lot of thinking on the C3 team about what Catholic capital means in this moment. I think an impact investing as Catholic investors we often focus on this potential to seed and scale enterprises solutions and markets that can generate positive outcomes as we just heard in the previous examples. And that is one set of core goals for individual impact investors and impact investing movement. What I think 2020 has made clear with co vid with the ensuing economic crisis with the reinvigorated efforts to combat structural racism. Is that this is not enough, and that we need to elevate our sites as a movement to the end goal of building a system of finance and investment that is purposefully inclusive. And that itself contributes to a more just and equitable economy. And our notion is that Catholic capital can make a meaningful contribution to this boulder end goal. It's not the only thing we need to change in finance to make it happen but it's part of it. Through the media network we've taken our strategy at the level to this remit of reimagining capitalism which is looking at a broader set of upstream issues around how the economic system and finance needs to change that require major changes in policy and culture and norms. And that fundamental ideas about we think about the purpose of the economy. And in that frame we think part of that is more deeply integrating why conventional finance excludes or fails to reach some communities. And what we want to do to respond to that structural failure to overcome barriers to access and biases inherent in and how investments done today. I think why we think catalytic capital is part of that is the point you started at the at the top Harvey on being oriented towards the impact centering the impact and the beneficiaries that we're all trying to reach at the end of the day, because we assess this catalytic capital is about being flexible, bending the strictures of traditional finance towards the needs and constraints of investors and beneficiaries we're trying to reach that they themselves are trying to build more just and inclusive markets and as you said, meeting more than more where they, they are rather than starting with what are constraints and investors. And so that's why we think catalytic capital is one ingredient that can help then financial markets towards more just and inclusive outcomes. And to your point on the tipping point, I think one of the silver linings of what's otherwise been a devastating crisis has been seeing how impact is investors have responded to these crises. For example, COVID by responding to their investors flexibly, providing bridge financing providing actual technical expertise on weathering the crisis providing more patient and flexible terms. That is being catalytic and that it's being flexible and responding to the moment. These are examples of what the open road alliance has done and mobile mobilizing a rapid response fund for social enterprises to provide that bridge financing in the very weeks after COVID hit. And that government has done or could do right dedicated resources to CDFI is that army talked about to provide essentially catalytic backstopping to enable CDFI is to deploy catalytic capital we think there's even more they could do to intentionally target to attract funds to minority depository institution so it's we're ensuring those resources reach the businesses and communities that are most needed that have been most impacted by by COVID. And in the US that's that's communities of color and black communities in particular. And so, I think those are signals of seeing how mainstream how catalytic capital is being deployed in ways we had an envisioned a year ago in this context of resilience and crisis response and it's just another way we see this coming into, not just being something on the side but a core way we think need to think about impact investing going forward. Great. Thank you Chris. Lots of great thoughts there about about this moment and I guess the drivers of this work both before and before 2020 and now you know in 2020 in this most unexpected year. If I could now turn to the question of, you know what do we do right so hopefully by now we've all taken away. This is a great time and important time to be working on it. But for those of us who do want to engage on helping to build this field what you know what are the things we should be paying attention to one of the things that we could be doing. And I'd love to hear from all members of the panel. I don't know if I could turn to you first. You've encountered many of these barriers and challenges, you know through the zero gap work would be great to hear about what you found and what needs to be worked on. Yeah, absolutely. Thanks Harvey. I think maybe just to take a segment of that question because I think it's a much bigger question and to be honest, you know, and all three panelists will talk to us but I think this is something that we want to work on right. This is sort of the work we task ourselves with and and are trying to build a community around but maybe just to take one segment of it. I mean, I think, you know, if you think about sort of the barriers to the use of catalytic capital right like the barriers to deployment and the execution of that catalytic capital and thinking about it really from the access side, you know, for me it comes down to, you know, kind of the three things that we talked about before it's not enough catalytic capital it's really hard to access and when it's put into the field it's oftentimes under leveraged and so the question is, how do we really think about attacking, you know, attacking those three points and do we have good examples of, you know what we can do better or where we can go next and I think you know even in my own portfolio just maybe highlight with some examples of where this plays out, or some of these barriers are playing out but again I, you know, the overarching message isn't so much that, you know, this has been solved or that the Rockefeller Foundation can, you know, hand a guidebook down to everyone it's that this is the work to be done right is that catalytic capital can play a very important role and we have to overcome some of these barriers but, you know, on one hand I think about sort of, you know, we have an example that's in our portfolio, focused on sort of revenue based financing and revenue based investment in the United States and we've looked at this through the capital access lab which was done in partnership with Kauffman Foundation and through impact assets and we looked at that from a perspective of, you know, this is a powerful tool that we think can go much deeper, you know, this is a tool where we think there are emerging managers who are able to deploy this kind of funding in the United States to help small businesses get off the ground to focus on them in a different way than venture capital would have. Lots of good reasons to, you know, to look at this space and, you know, when we got started we kind of said the problem that they've got is that these are smaller managers and the foundations are looking at it, you know, looking for the capital access right and there's not really an ability to sort of build the field how do they actually access the capital that we actually do want to provide, albeit maybe in smaller chunks than we typically would and so, you know, when we join the capital access lab a big part of that, you know, effort was to find a way to see lots of managers at smaller ticket sizes than we would normally be able to underwrite and so it's like, it's you know, sort of tools like this that I think we're really creative. I think, you know, another one that I really like, which I hope is in my portfolio at some point in the future but you know there's a group called CNOTE that works on the CDFI front, you know, that Ernie was talking about and if you've met CNOTE you've seen a great story in terms of building the pipes to smaller CDFIs, helping all those smaller CDFIs access, you know, consistent capital over time. And so, you know, in another instance I also say like, Listen, this is a great example of where foundations can come in and help to backstop and support and grow a market where investors are wanting to get engaged and wanting to be involved there. And so, you know, for me again, it really comes down to there's lots of these barriers I think that we can be smarter with how we deploy our catalytic capital, we can be clear with how we deploy our catalytic capital and a lot of instances you see partnerships like what's emerging on this, you know, on this stage right now where foundations do want to come together and put out, you know, bigger chunks or more intentional chunks into big sectors and so, you know, for me it's an exciting time to think about more depth about how do we actually get past those barriers how do we make catalytic capital easier for folks to use and to use more efficiently and to use more quickly and those kinds of things. Great. Thank you, Adam. Chris, could I send you for your thoughts on what's needed to really move the field. Sure. I mean, I think the building on Adam's comment where we're trying to make it bring more investors in and help the existing practitioners get better and more effective at deploying catalytic capital. First, I think part of it is, is providing just easier on ramps for investors of all different stripes from family offices to foundations to government actors to development finance institutions to to either get on the pathway or scale up to their deployment of catalytic capital. One way, a media has tried to do that is to share our own approach. And we put out across the returns that continue a couple years ago which shared our, our framework and methodology for thinking about when we consider catalytic capital and what conditions have to be in place for us to think that's the right approach versus either a market rate investment or or a grant. And we hope that framework was useful for others and probably most useful for those similar to us family office or foundation that's doing early stage venture investing. And as you know, maybe less relevant for investors of different stripes and that's one reason, the year after we worked on the beyond trade off series to share the approaches of eight different investors for how they manage risk return impact constraints in their in their investing their philosophies for when and where to deploy catalytic capital and that ranged from early stage VC and emerging markets with the likes of Locke and Elevar to Ford as a major foundation to Prudential and Goldman Sachs on the mainstream side. And so we think getting those examples out there because every investor is different in their, in their, their goals, their risk return priorities their impact priorities, the asset classes they work in and the more we think is shared about different investors approach on the, the when and the where and the why, the more useful that is for new investors to take that on board and adapt that to their context. And the second piece like helping practitioners get better. I think what we think is important, and I think what C three things important is looking at catalytic context capital in the context of specific asset classes, or impact context or, or and saying how do we get more effective about and rigorous about catalytic capital in that context. And so here I think there's great field building efforts going on in a range of domains. For example, I think the smallholder agriculture finance community has done a great job with organizations like the Council for smallholder agricultural finance and a Sally and Alliance of a bunch of the big aglenders to to share their data and get much more rigorous around where catalytic capital is needed, and agricultural lending, what additional impact that enables what farmers that allows you to reach either further down the income scale or in harder geographies or unless well organized value chains, and then really be able to go back to investors and say this is the impact. This is why we need in catalytic capital a very specific impact context to make the case for it. We're going to partner with others, including MacArthur on the collaborative for frontier finance, which is again looking at catalytic capital in the context of investing in small and growing businesses and emerging markets in the missing middle that are too big for micro finance, don't have the growth expectations of traditional venture capital and too early stage for debt lending, and that needs some of the alternative financing instruments that Adam mentioned like revenue based finance or fund structures that allow longer time frames for for exit or self liquidating structures are flexible that that allow exit pathways in that regard. And here, I think we think, just like we need catalytic capital for pioneering enterprises we need catalytic capital for pioneering financial intermediaries and fund managers and so these great fund managers and emerging markets that are pioneering hybrid structures for us to be investing need investors that are risk tolerant and need a community that stops working on okay what are the right what can we learn from the challenges and constraints of investing and the need for capital and capital in that context so see a lot of potential for for collaboration at this kind of sector asset class sort of intersection. Thank you Chris, and it's great to hear both you Chris and Adam speak to this idea of changing how money's flowed I think those questions come up in the chat about not just flowing money to work needed but how money is flowed and thinking about new instruments and structures to do that actually match better to to invest these needs and constraints. So, me, could I turn to you now me you've really been at, you know, in the vanguard of helping to pull together the C3 program that's just been launched around knowledge and market building. So would love to hear you speak more to that and just more broadly what it's needed to build the field. Thank you everybody. So, yes, hopefully you've all seen and request Emily I think he's put the information in the chat as well. We just launched the C3 grant making program. This is how stuff new venture fund. Thank you to new venture fund for working with us on this. And we're inviting proposals for research essentially strengthening the evidence base. I'm going to take a step back and tell you a little bit about where and how and why we landed here. So I think over the course of the last year and a half we've had extensive conversations. Working with different consulting partners with investors to understand where the barriers were in there being able to deploy more catalytic capital into some more effectively. And, and this grant making program really hopes to bring forward some knowledge and tools that can equip these investors to do both those things. You know, enter the field and do so efficiently and effectively and thereby hoping to significantly increase the amount of catalytic capital available and in use in the field. The gaps that we saw were really to do with understanding what the role is when is catalytic capital being used and I see some of the flowing in the questions in the chat as well. When do you use it? Where has it been used so far? Why has it been used? What is the kind of subsidy that is needed? What are the structures that are used? Who are the other investors in the picture? And so that a lot of it talks to sort of the how in the transaction design piece. Also, again comments in the chat and hopefully we can come back to this in the discussion in a bit. The question of, when is it needed? When is it creating negative externalities that you should be worried about? Where are you doing something that is not needed and not required for catalytic capital to be involved in? And we hope to actually answer some of these questions by looking at examples and transactions that have already happened over the course of the last several years through this research program. And I think that what will really help investors is to be able to see more structure, evidence and clear frameworks around thinking about when and how to deploy catalytic capital. And as we've all said, it's very scarce. It plays a very significant role in terms of being able to bring more private financing to the table, right? Either simultaneously in a blended structure. So down the road by demonstrating viable models and allowing enterprises to scale in a significant way. So I think the question here is really for us to figure out how best to support investors and we hope to really engage and learn from investors through this work. In addition to the research plans that we've just announced, we would be looking at two, three other elements that we hope will help further these goals. One is we will be working with practitioners on tools and specific frames. Chris referred to this a little bit in the context of different sectors, themes and asset classes to think about where catalytic capital specific tools and frameworks may be useful to them. And in addition to that, we're also hoping to partner with some of the networks that have different investor groups where we know catalytic capital is provided a significant amount of it comes from the public agencies. Some of it comes also from the foundations and family offices. And we hope to really engage with the different groups that are talking to these investor communities and be able to both, I think, learn from what they have been doing and help them get access to the right kind of knowledge and resources that might further their own aims and their participation in catalytic capital provision. So with that, I hand back to Harvey and looking forward to digging into some of the questions we saw. Great. Thank you so much, Ermi. And I will say also that coming out of the work that I and colleagues have been doing with the C3 partners, we also put out an article in SSIR that came out on Monday, which touches on many of these points about trying to really address what investors need to know to help them move forward. And I will just post that in the session chat now. And so thank you for all your questions. I've been following them with great interest. I think some of them have been picked up as we've gone through the discussion. I might sort of pull some of them together and put to the panel something of a there is a sort of big and maybe slightly philosophical question here. I've seen a few comments saying, well, isn't catalytic capital, what impact investing should be anyway? You know, is there a way to reposition it as the core? I think there was also a question about is there a tension in terms of how we use catalytic capital to engage conventional investing, which is taking a very extractive, which is very extractive. You know, are we essentially subsidizing a very extractive mode of investing? Should we not be trying to push towards a sort of reinvention or reshaping? I think there was also another question about is this a moment or a way of actually trying to reshape a whole paradigm of what investing is and what capital is and what finances. I think these are quite large questions, and I love that people are pushing there and it very much lines up with all the conversations I've heard over the past couple of days. I love people to weigh in on that. Great there. A big and great questions, Harvey, on, you know, is this all of impact investing, should it all impact investing be catalytic? I mean, I think this catalytic capital is essential to achieving impact in many sectors and many contexts. And we've talked a lot about how the need for market segmentation and map out the roles that different types of capital play in different contexts. And many of the on the call are probably familiar with the impact management project. And there kind of investors impact matrix which maps out kind of types of impact and what importantly what contribution investors can make to that impact, one of which is providing flexible capital that's an active contribution the investor can make to the end impact. Another is engaging actively with those and investees. And so I think it's just a useful framework we're seeing where catalytic capital plays versus other parts of the broader impact investing in ESG movements which I think are also important to that end goal of transforming how finance works right if we want to transform the whole financial system. We also need the ESG players and fiduciaries that are constrained by fiduciary duty investing at market rate returns to also be pushing to be activists investors that push corporates on their ESG behaviors and so I think it's different different roles for different kinds of investors and importance is having a frame for how they all fit together. And all of you know is catalytic capital subsidizing commercial investment, it could it lead to extractive behaviors. This is where I think that that combination of providing flexible capital and being an active investor as part of one's investor contribution is really important. So if you're funding and a blended capital stack into an enterprise which now commercial vcs or private investors are moving into, is there a way to maintain a seat on the board and an active voice to be that kind of voice for impacts, and ensure the enterprise and its management can stay centered on that and managing those tensions but I think it's clearly attention as you move from seeding to scaling pathways and blends of investors with different motivations. But what I point to is that that value of active engagement and invoice with with industries and boards and other structures where where you can have those conversations. I think just one, a couple things to add I guess, for my own end. One I love the philosophical questions as well and I find myself on a very personal level one who thinks, I think it's great we should push for huge market transformation right like big shifts in the way we think. But then I also recognize you know the reality is these things move over time and and you know norms are set not just by a foundation creating a project but by you know actors acting differently and being inspired by projects but one of the things I want to say with catalytic capital and the role it plays in here is, you know, there's sort of, there's always been a role for catalytic capital and the markets wrote all time right different variations maybe not called catalytic capital maybe it's a public sector subsidy we're talking about maybe it's, you know, early stage investments I'm thinking back to like, you know, Benjamin Franklin has a he leaves money to the cities to create you know zero own funds for small businesses and artists like there's been a role for sort of kickstarting markets in many different circumstances and I think what we're trying to do here is really sort of highlight that role and get better at that role and see how that role might guide the markets in the future in a more intentional way than perhaps it has in the past right let's study it more than we've done. And so that's why I think it's, it's not so much that, you know, is this line between are we, you know, are we just subsidizing the markets or are we, you know, not accepting, you know, that the markets need bigger transformation I actually think we're trying to fight both of those things we do want bigger transformation, but we do think catalytic capital has always played a very or I think catalytic capital has always played a very important role from many different actors and there's a chance here to be a little bit more intentional and a little bit more thoughtful about it. I also think that it goes well beyond this idea of just purely subsidy and this goes back to my example about offered energy but a lot of what we're trying to do is just say, you know, these markets need, they need to jumpstart they need someone to just, you know, set up a technology fund that's going to help pull through certain battery technologies or create demand, you know, on clarity so that the, you know, that others can build 20 or business plans around understanding what's going to be sold in the future and things like that. You know, I think one example we invested in a group called and it's a project that I really, really love and it's close to my heart it's called six up and they're focused on, you know, sort of challenging, challenging the basics of credit scores for 18 year olds as they try to get access to student loans right and that's always been the model and I actually don't even like that right I think that we can probably rethink that model a lot but but at a bare minimum that model doesn't serve our population evenly it serves people who either have parents who can guarantee that credits or somehow at 18 years old built themselves a credit score already. So basically it serves the you know the highest ends and they're trying to say actually a student's potential has nothing to do with that it has more to do with who that student is and where they're getting access to go to college and things like that and and you know so that's one where they've gotten access to some capital they've got that fund up and running there you know they're not without their challenges of being a new business but where we come in as we come in to say not so much that we want to subsidize others. But we want to make sure that when you test that thesis right that all students are the same you go as deep as possible on testing it and so you know there's going to be a limit as to where commercial capital will go they might be willing to give up in the fight goes for slightly they might be willing to bend it slightly but they're not going to go all the way and our job is to say if you're going to test it let's test it all the way down let's look at all this students that aren't being served. And so we come in and really pick up the loans that are quite able to make it into the broader community fund and I think. Sometimes that's more of an example what I like is it's sort of stretching finance right if you're going to test you're going to offend some some you know deeply held assumption. Then let's fully test it and so I think there's a lot of examples as to you know my own philosophical one is kind of the capital how has it been used and what can we do with it but I think more sophistication and more creativity are really helpful. So maybe did you want to come in there. I feel like a lot. But to do quick very quick comments. One, I think all of this is interesting and I think highly highly relevant. This makes me take back to the sort of basic fundamentals right so I think have you touched on it. What is the underlying situation condition gap that is creating the need for you know non conventional non commercial money and that will essentially tell you where the role is and where the market or the you know the capital markets are sort of not being able to meet the need given given their structure. So I think sort of identifying the need and responding to that need. And the second thing I would say is being very clear about the intention and purpose of providing that money one is obviously you're meeting that need at the base of it right but to what end what end goal do we have bought impact we want to see and stay true to that through the process. You know this is not about sort of providing money in where it seems like it's a very heroic nice thing to do and not being able to track down the road. What resulted in which sorts of factors came in and and the reality is that you know if you think about the SDG financing graph, we need private capital at the table right if you want to make any sort of dent in that we want to bring more actors in and so thinking about the spectrum and thinking about ways to both incentivize and engage other actors up and down the spectrum I think isn't critical to the success of capital and the goal set up to achieve. Right. Thank you. I mean, and thank you all of you I think you stepped up the plate on a very big and and so any questions. And I think just to add, you know my own thoughts for that I think what we're proposing here is very much. I think someone who's actually in the session I won't say who because I'm not sure about liberty to share but someone said to me. You know, as we're waiting for this entire system to be transformed and for capitalism to be reinvented. What do we do. You know, are we going to press ahead and actually try to meet some of these urgent needs. Or are we not and I guess what we have here is really an urgent call to act in the ways that we can with the players that we have around the table. You know, and that doesn't stop us being more ambitious about how we think the whole system can be proved. I think there are some more practical questions here about, you know, how do we actually move into doing this. So there was a question about foundations. You know, how do foundations really move into this and set up the right structures, the channel funds, how the foundations think about combining grants with capital and what's that intersection and any other sort of structural barriers that might be there. I think this was in relation to fiduciary duty but also other structural barriers for other kinds of investors. And I wonder in the few couple of minutes that we've got left if anyone wants to opine on, you know, some of those practicalities that may be barriers for foundations other kinds of investors moving in. I can take a very quick shot and I'm sure the others have views. And so I would say, yes, you know, the set of questions came up extensively as we looked at the barriers to the use of. You know, knowledge cuts are one end but sort of once you have the knowledge and you are let's say a convert and you're ready to deploy what holds you back and that really varies from group to group, but in general, sort of capacities and the knowledge at hand is hard as most of you know, capital transactions and then the finance transactions tend to be very bespoke, very complicated, expensive. So, you know, smaller and newer actors kind of very hard to get in. And there are some sort of, I think novel actors that are coming in that are trying to address this. There are also platforms that try to provide some of this information in a more cost effective way. So I think the how is really tough and varies. We've seen different solutions work for different folks. There's, you know, and we're hoping as we start working with industry networks that will be able to come up with some more concrete solutions that can address these structured ideas. Maybe just to follow on, just to continue. I mean, I'll go quicker because then we're running out of time. But, you know, once I think that a lot of these actors are doing catalytic apple right like this is actually part of what's happening. And so part of it for me is like, you know, when we think about it, for example, and, you know, this is maybe the Rockefeller side but I think it's also built into a lot of some of the C3 thinking it's like, who are you mobilizing and why and how, right? And do we have the right players mobilized and have we thought about what a handoff to those, you know, those players look like. And it's just being a little bit more thoughtful about the role you're actually going to be playing and what sort of negative externalities might be created by that role. But more importantly, probably what positive externalities have you missed by not being a little bit more intentional or thoughtful in the way you've approached it. So, you know, I tend to think that a lot of this is happening. I think that we can learn from each other and that's a big goal of the C3 initiative here, right? Is to share more stories and to write up more case studies and let people know why we're focusing the way we're focusing. I just want to go real quick just to the chat question I could take my I'm already speaking privilege here for the moment but I think, you know, there's a lot of questions about daffs and what role daffs are going to play and we've looked at this for, for, you know, I would say my own, my own career two years now we've been spending really studying three years maybe daffs and we've got a few partnerships in place with various folks to really think about what role daffs can play. And the thing that has always struck me is two fold one is, I think that we always assume daffs are catalytic capital, or that their impact investment or that they're, you know, very different from the rest of the financial community and one reality that I personally subscribe to is that that's just not the case most of the daff money is not thought of from an impact perspective it's it's it's a tax planning perspective and that doesn't have to be a bad thing it's just to say that it's not this you know, 10s of billions of dollars of money that's sitting out there that being said I think there's a lot of really motivated money in there still right the premise isn't completely wrong and so you know we've looked at it I think there's some really creative things I think impact assets does some great work I think cap shift thinking about the role of recoverable grants is fantastic and how do folks get involved because that's a total game changer for some of the bigger daffs. We've looked at some of the community foundations and you know how can we get them engaged in issues that are very very central to their own communities right where you might actually be able to mobilize the impact segment of a daff that maybe or maybe is not as as central to the way they think so. I do think daffs have an enormous role to play and the only thing I would like I said caution is. You know it's not inherent that because they're a donor buys fund that they are in fact impact investors in fact the vast majority of them don't view that do it through that lens so we just need to be a little careful about what the expectations are. Great thank you so much Adam I think we've only got a few seconds left I'm going to wrap it up there. Thank you everyone. And I final thing I'll say is that you know really this is an invitation to all of you all of us to really help build this one made the comment in the chat that actually a lot of stuff that we're talking about that so cap is catalytic or requires kind of capital I think that's right. This is the crowd I hope that really cares about this and wants to build this going forward. So I really would commend to you all the resources and thinking and work that's been mentioned today. I'm going to try to paste all the links, including some new ones that have been mentioned today. Do look at them and really encourage you to you know have a really good think about what you can do to play your part take this forward. So thank you all for joining us today from wherever you are in the world apologies again for starting a few minutes late but I hope that was useful for all of you. And thank you to our panel for sharing your thoughts today and for your leadership. Thank you Harvey. Have a good day everyone.