 Good morning, everyone. As Monique said, this is going to be a super interactive session. We're going to very briefly go through some some groundwork setting and then we're going to give you an exercise we're going to guide you through and then we'll have some follow-on discussion after that, okay? So first of all, I just want to give the people who are here on stage an opportunity to let you know the perspectives we're bringing to this conversation and we're going to have an opportunity to hear about yours as well. So I'm Julie Ann Zimmerman with ReInventure Capital in Boston, Massachusetts, and we invest exclusively in US-based companies led and controlled by BIPOC and or female founders and we do that for both high return and high social, racial, gender, economic and financial impact. Rachel. Hi, I'm Rachel Robesioti. I'm the founder and CEO of Adesina Social Capital. We coined the phrase social justice investing and brought that to public markets, which means that we integrate issues of racial, gender, economic and climate justice into portfolios. We also mobilize investors to make large systemic impact, leveraging the power in public markets. Hey everybody, I am Elaine Rasmussen, founder and CEO of Social Impact Now. We are an impact investing advisory firm, but we also do equitable economic development advising. But I also am a general partner in the Integrated Capital Fund, which we found it last year, which prioritizes investing in black, brown and rural businesses in Minnesota. Good morning. I'm Erica Seth-Davies. I use she, her pronouns. I'm the CEO of ReInventure, as well as the founder of the Racial Equity Asset Lab. At ReInventure, we're advancing reproductive and maternal health, and we do that through venture investing, ecosystem building, narrative change, and corporate engagement, shareholder advocacy, and with the Racial Equity Asset Lab or the real social enterprise that's focused on addressing the racial wealth gap through the intersection of racial equity and impact investing. Cool. Hi, and I'm Havel Rodriguez, one of the founding partners of New Majority Capital, based out of Providence, Rhode Island, and Boston. We are focused on closing the racial wealth gap as well, but with a different approach. Our approach is about entrepreneurship through acquisition, acquisition of the position, which is changing sort of the mindset and giving BIPOC and women the technical resources and skills they need to acquire an existing business and grow it as opposed to starting something from scratch. We take advantage of this silver tsunami of baby boomers retiring in the U.S. We see this as an opportunity to transfer asset ownership, in this case, small business asset ownership, over to underrepresented communities. Awesome. Thank you. So you already have a sense that we do not represent by any means the total spectrum of all ways you can deploy a capital for impact, but a really interesting sampling of very different approaches. We intentionally titled this session, Make It So, Put Your Money, Your Money to Work Now to Create the Change You Seek, because all of us of any capacity have the ability to make choices about how and where our money is invested. So I, for example, have decision making authority with the ReInventure Fund, but as an individual, I'm also a retail investor. I have alma mater institutions where I have a voice. I have retirement accounts, right? So regardless of what your capacity may be, regardless of what role you may occupy, regardless of the amount of capital you have authority over your own or somebody else's, this is a conversation for you. You are in the right place. So we're going to do a lot of interaction today. I encourage you all while we're doing these exercises together to participate on Slido. We'll also do shows of hands so you can all see each other and see your responses. So we'll get started. The first set of questions is what's your, bless you, what's your perspective? What point of view or what perspective are you bringing to this conversation? So by a show of hands, who is representing institutional asset allocation? Anyone? By a show of hands, who represents a family office or an individual practice of significant means? A couple, yeah? By a show of hands, who is in an intermediary or an advisory role? Okay. And by a show of hands, who is investing your own money at whatever scale? Awesome. Okay. So you begin to have a sense of all the perspectives and many of us occupy more than one, right? And we're going to address those together. So before we get started, we're just going to frame the conversation. So we all have common foundation and common concepts for this conversation. So we're not going to relitigate the question of whether impact investing or responsible investing is a good thing. For the purposes of this conversation, that's settled, right? So investing for both financial and impact outcomes is simply the bare entry point for responsible prudent investing. Moreover, if you're looking at the status quo, again, the framing for this conversation is the status quo is not safe. The status quo is not producing positive returns. The status quo is systemically extractive, destructive and repressive. Therefore, when we look at best practices, we need to interrogate those for the ways in which they are actively propagating those harms. And we also have the power to recognize that those harms are not unavoidable. They're not a given. We don't have to accept them. We can make other choices. One of my favorite quotes, and I think everybody on the panel knows this quote. Maybe all of you do as well. Joy Anderson has this fantastic quote. She said, we made this shit up. We can make up better shit, right? So finally, it is not only something we aspire to, but it is possible. And the people on this podium and many of you in the room are already doing this work, investing for both financial and other outcomes. And our objective for this session today specifically is for everyone in the room to come out of this session with at least one actionable commitment. You can take maybe even while you're still here at SoCAP or maybe just after you return home. So with that in mind, we're going to do a little exercise together. And this is why we encourage you all to sit with other people because this is going to be a joint exercise. How many people in the room? Just really quick, for the people who just arrived, if you will go on your cell phone or on your laptop and go to slido. S-L-I-D-O.com and put in SoCAP 22. We've got some interactive questions. I just want to make sure the folks that are coming in didn't miss that. Everybody got it? Okay, so while we're doing that, and who in the room remembers Choose Your Own Adventure books? From childhood. So a few of you, awesome. Any RPG players, role-playing game players? Alright, any improv enthusiasts? Okay, so you know what we're going to do. We're going to go through a scenario together and we're going to play a role. You are going to work from a scenario in which you are on the investment committee of Do Good Foundation. And Do Good Foundation has, with some internal uncertainty, some skepticism from several members of the board, nevertheless made a commitment to put its assets in alignment with its mission. And you, as a member of the investment committee, have gotten approval for a revised and updated investment policy statement. And you've been directed to come back to the next board meeting with an update on how you're going to go about beginning to realign Do Good Foundation's investment portfolio to be congruent with its mission. Okay? You've already discovered that some of the Do Good Foundation portfolio is directly contrary or antithetical or incongruous with the foundation's mission. And you've communicated this to the consultant. The consultant is generally enthusiastic, at least in their public statements about aligning investments with purpose, but they haven't been super enthusiastic so far in their responses to you. Okay? So here's your first proposition. First of all, everybody understand the scenario? You are an investment committee member, right? At the table, we're asking you as a group at each table by consensus to choose an option. Right? Each of you putting yourselves in that position. Option one is you set new reporting requirements to your consultant. You say, okay, look, this is what we need from you now. And we need you to deliver an assessment of our portfolio against our mission and we need you to report on that to us. Or option two is you say, you know what, this consultant representation is not withstanding has not been super enthusiastic about supporting this change. So let's release a request for proposals for a new consultant. So I'm going to give you just about a minute to discuss amongst yourselves at each table, which of those options do you want to take? And I'll come back to you and we'll proceed to the next decision point, okay? So quickly, quickly, this is going to be like literally 60 seconds quickly, quickly. Which way do you jump? For those who chose option one, notifying the consultant of new reporting requirements. So here's what happens. Meeting actually goes better than you expected based on their internal original resistance. But they tell you it's going to take at least 30 days to come back to you with new data. So you already know again from the scenario setup that some portion and probably the majority of your portfolio is at odds with your mission. So what do you do next, right? And we'll give you the options in just a second. That's your setup for your next decision point. If you chose option two, you know that it's going to take you at least 90 days to issue the RFP, get back responses, and choose a new consultant. Dead minimum, right? And you are on the hook to report back in the next quarterly board meeting. So what are you going to do in the interim? How are you going to make good use of that 90 days so that you can report back to the board as instructed, right? That's your next decision point. Everybody clear? Awesome. So here are your options. First, option one, you have two options. One, assess your priorities while you wait for the updated report. So in other words, internal work. What are we going to focus on as soon as we do get that report? What are we going to prioritize? Second option, option one, B, start pulling capital from the most egregious investments. We're going to, again, for the purposes of the exercise, we're going to say you have the authority to do that. You may pull those investments. So do you do that? Do you begin taking action? For those of you who chose to issue the RFP, option A is similarly learn while you wait. Get as smart as you can internally about the options you're going to ask the new consultant to pursue for you. Because, again, clock's ticking. You have to report. Second option to B is, again, we're assuming you have the authority to act. Start prioritizing new investments you can make right now with the assets that are directly under your disposal. So go ahead and start making investments congruent with the mission. All clear? Okay, so I'm going to give you about two minutes to fight it out. Nicely. And, again, the goal is at the table, you want to come to a consensus or at least grudging agreement on which option you're going to pursue based on meeting that objective, right? You're coming back to the board at the next quarterly meetings, tell them how you're moving forward on this strategy. So, once again, here's what happens after you've made your choices. So for those of you who chose 1A, a sizable fraction of the room, guess what? Reorienting your portfolio is not going to be instantaneous and not only that, it's going to require both you and your consultant to do things differently than you have done, right? It's going to require you to make significant changes in the way you go about your investment decisions. So where will you turn for information, for guidance, for models you can adapt or learn from, right? That's option 1A. Option 1B, you're going to begin pulling capital, so you have the authority to act, but you also have very limited bandwidth, right? Your time is already stretched. So, do you focus on the very most egregious public equity investments or do you focus on the most egregious private or alternatives in your portfolio? Where do you focus your attention? 2A, again, you've decided that you're going to basically learn as much as you can in the short period of time available, the 90 days while your RFP is issued and processing. And so, again, where are you going to look for deeper insights into how to make sure that when you bring that new consultant aboard, first of all, you've selected the right one and second, you can put them to effective use right out of the gate, right? So again, where do you turn for that information, for those resources, for those examples you can draw from and adapt to your purposes? And finally, option 2B, the fantastic thing is you already, you chose this option because you already know some things you're excited about that are totally congruent with your mission at Do Good Foundation, bless you. So, the question you have is do you go ahead and press on with those investments based on what you already know or do you fold in your colleagues from the program side of the house, right? Do you continue to keep investments and programs totally separate or do you begin to find ways to share intelligence and work together? Clear? Everybody clear on the options? Okay, awesome. So, we're going to give you three minutes because as we get deeper, you have more to talk about. Three minutes to come up with, again, consensus please, if you can, about what you do next. How do you proceed? Who chose 1A? Which tables chose 1A? Okay. All right. Who chose 1B? Yeah? Okay. Who chose 2A? 2A, yeah? Who chose 2B? Okay. All right. So, in this room, given a fairly simple set of decisions, we already see that we end up in very different paths, right? Which is totally representative. So, last set of decisions for this exercise. Under 1A, those of you who chose 1A, where will you turn for guidance? Will it be industry sources or your stakeholders? Right? 1B, for those of you who chose public equities or private equities, right? Which way did you decide to go? Option 2A, again, where are you going to turn? Industry sources or your stakeholders? And option 2B, are you going to keep your investments separate or are you going to work with your program colleagues, right? So, as you worked through those, who ended up thinking we're going to turn to our industry sources, we're going to turn to published materials, we're going to turn to the practices of our peers? Let me give you, yeah? You did? Anybody else? Yeah? Anybody choose stakeholders? Yeah? Okay. For learning while you wait, the 2A option, who chose, again, industry sources? Who chose stakeholders? Stakeholders. For 2B, prioritizing new investments? Who prefers to keep them separate? Who prefers to fold in your program peers to the conversation? Yeah. Okay. So, sorry. So, here's the fantastic news. No matter which of these options you chose, the good news is there are immediate steps you can take, right? So if you chose 1A, guess what? There's a lot of resources. We hear people complain all the time. There's not enough information. There's not enough data. There aren't enough published reports. Simply not true. And Erika has very graciously offered to share a list of resources after the fact for anyone who's interested. We also offer some on our website and each of the speakers today has plenty of references to offer. If you chose your stakeholders, again, guess what? There is a lot you can learn immediately from your stakeholders. And Rachel particularly is a pioneering expert in using stakeholder input to drive investment strategy and decisions. If you chose public equities, again, here's some great news. You actually have a couple of investments in your portfolio that are aligned with your mission. You have the opportunity to double down on those. You have the opportunity to move money into new investments that are aligned with your mission with the money you've pulled from the most egregious ones. And you also have the option to go back to some of the maybe egregious but less egregious ones and practice shareholder activism. So you, again, have options. You have actions you can take right away. If you chose alternatives, a couple of the funds in your portfolio are maturing or have matured. Well, guess what? You don't have to reinvest with that same manager. You can move that money to a different manager who is aligned with your mission. Right? And there are lots to choose from. 2A1 and 2AB, excuse me, 2A2 are essentially repeats of 1A1 and 1AB. So again, good news there. And 2B1, if you're proceeding on a separate basis, the good news there is that there's really nothing to slow you down. Your team has already been given the mandate to act. You have the authority to act. Go. 2B2, guess what? Your program colleagues are excited to have the opportunity to participate in this conversation. So again, there's really nothing slowing you down. Now, I know because we had a show of hands and because many of you entered your responses into Slido that doing this role-playing exercise, not everyone is actually an investment committee member. Most of you aren't. But here's the fantastic thing. When we look at the epilogue for this fictitious persona you just pretended to occupy, these decisions are fundamentally, structurally the same decisions no matter who you are, no matter how many assets of what classes or what categories or what volume, how much money you have. You have essentially the same decisions at your disposal in all of the roles you represent, right? So no matter how much money is at your disposal or in what form, you have the ability to go through these same decisions. And so just to conclude our exercise, your investment committee persona has gone through the challenge to report back to the board. And regardless of which of those options you ended up with, you actually have significant progress to report to the board. Moreover, because you've gone through this exercise and because you've made these decisions, you have far greater confidence that you had at the beginning of the assignment that there actually is a pathway forward and that you know the steps to take to begin to move towards that aligned portfolio. Not only that, but some of the skeptical board members who remain skeptical are nevertheless listening to what you're saying. And you've created new relationships with peers and colleagues you're excited to further share your process with, right? So there's even in these very first steps, even in these very first steps, even though you haven't accomplished 100% aligned portfolio, nevertheless you have already begun making real progress moving money to create the change you seek. So now back to Slido. For those of you who are using it, there's a series of questions for you to fill in which of the options you ended up with, maybe some questions you have about resources that would be helpful to you. And so really quick, Julianne, I can only do them one at a time. So if you'll put your responses in, but with which was the result and then like every minute or so, I'll prompt the next question. Awesome. Thank you. That's why I have my computer in front of me. Everybody have the link? Okay, perfect. So really quickly, because we still also want to get to our fantastic speakers. Does anybody want to share any epiphanies that came out of your conversation? Did anything come out in this exercise that surprised you? I wanted to be clear. I'm speaking on behalf of my table and not for myself. Some of the epiphanies that came out one was a level of complexity that we would have to deal with, that there will always be challenges in trying to achieve our mission, that we will have to prioritize what can be done and what's the efficacy of what can be done, that we will have to have data and data will have to be part of the conversation with the senior leadership or the board members. Is there anything else? I feel like that was the most important ones. Yeah, absolutely. Go ahead. Thank you. I don't know if this is as much an epiphany, but I think it was really easy for our table to gain consensus because it just seemed so obvious to us. And so I was kind of like, well, why doesn't this happen more frequently and more quickly at various institutional asset owners and allocators? And I think what I was thinking at the back of my mind as we were talking about like selling out of certain positions is, well, we have all these great investment opportunities on the stage, right? Re-inventor capital, Adesina, Re-aventures. I'm not sure if you are fund managers as well, but there's just such a plethora of rich investment opportunities out there that like, why don't we move money quicker to some of these more positive investments and then why isn't this happening at a quicker pace? I think that's a whole session, in fact, a whole day all by itself, but thank you for raising it. And I think part of it goes back to, again, setting the ground rules for this conversation. In many cases, I think people feel very much constrained by the quote-unquote best practices by trying to justify a move away from the status quo, which is contrary to the evidence understood by many organizations to mean a reduction in performance or an increase in risk, stepping away from the status quo feels threatening, when in fact we know from the data that the status quo is itself quite dangerous and harmful and moving away from the status quo often generates not only better impact, but very frequently substantially better financial returns as well. And that's a hard thing in many cases for people to embrace, right? One more before we move on. Any other epiphanies anybody wants to share? I was like, oh, they're going to give us the right answer because they probably did this and so there's going to be a cheat sheet of sorts. And then now all of the above applies. Yeah, yeah, exactly. There is no a priori right answer. There's no single path, right? And that is one of the reasons why it's possible for all of us, again, no matter our capacity, no matter our role, no matter the asset classes we work with, it's possible for all of us to move forward to invest our capital with our objectives, not only financial objectives, but our change objectives, right? So, and please share on Slido as well. And Elaine is walking through those. There are also requests for wins you have already experienced. So for those of you who are already doing this, please share what you have done that is already working. If you are ready to share a commitment you're making, fantastic. But also if you have a request to the community, something that would be helpful to you, or if you have an offer, something that you can share, there are points for you to enter that as well. And Slido so that everyone has the opportunity to get access to that because we can't really do it all verbally very efficiently. So, time for me to step back from the exercise and time for you to hear a discussion with our fantastic speakers. So, feel free to ask questions at any time. If something comes up for you going through the exercise, we definitely want to hear from you and make sure we're being responsive. But also just wanted to hear from the panel with respect to some of the areas where our work actually does show up in some of the good news categories of the exercise. So, I'm going to start with Rachel and ask a question about stakeholder engagement and what that looks like when you're doing work with public markets, public equities. And how challenging it can be to think intentionally and move intentionally with respect to stakeholder engagement, which I know is a key aspect of the work. So, interestingly enough, I'll just start by saying one of my epiphanies when we were kind of setting this up is that the very beginning of the Choose Your Own Adventure is exactly the place where most people who are values aligned get stuck. I can't tell you, there have been billions of dollars where people have told me directly, we love what you're doing, it's perfect, you're outperforming, we're going to invest with you, and they get stuck at the gatekeeper. So, to me the biggest epiphany is who's your gatekeeper and what kind of standards are you setting for them. And I'm really happy to share with you that Erica Seth Davies and I are two of the four co-creators of the due diligence 2.0 commitment. Usually what your gatekeeper is throwing back at you is a set of standards that's ostensibly there to keep you safe, the due diligence standards. But they have a lot of embedded racism, sexism, classism inside of them and work to keep our asset management industry 99% owned and controlled by white men. So, what we do in terms of talking to stakeholders in public markets is we work directly with the communities we intend to impact. And the communities that we intend to impact are those that suffer from issues of racial, gender, economic and climate justice. And so what that means is that rather than finance talking to itself to figure out what we need to do in these areas, we have social justice partners like the movement for black lives, ultraviolet, one fair wage. We have a stewardship circle of people from those partnerships that oversee the work that we do. And it's kind of a shortcut for foundations and others who are wanting to invest alongside their stakeholders because we are, if any foundation or asset owner or institution wants to target racial, gender, economic and climate justice, you really want the organization that's working with First Peoples worldwide and Climate Justice Alliance. So it's a really interesting way of putting together a portfolio and deciding which issues we're going to mobilize investors to work on, and it drives performance as well. Thank you. Hey, Will, I'm going to move to you. So I'm going to ask, I didn't ask the question, but Rachel answered it nonetheless, so I'm going to start with this. And coming up with a scenario or thinking about the scenario one, was there an aha for you or a very familiar aspect of it? And then hoping that you can talk a little bit about bringing a very new model into practice and how that has shown up within the process of the capital chain. You know, I think, I think one of the epiphanies was there's, you know, there are these sort of set ways of doing things, right? The investment that the consultants especially sort of have a prescribed way of way investments are analyzed and very often they're also looking for, you know, market returns or sort of want to put you into a peer group analysis. And that really holds back a lot of innovation and a lot of catalytic capital to be, to come to market. You know, as a new emerging manager, we're always trying to sort of push the envelope on, you know, what can we do to drive impact? And let's worry about the returns piece later, the cost of not doing what we're doing is a lot more than the cost of trying to fit into a box. So, yeah, I heard a couple of tables sort of talk about, you know, moving more towards being fully PRI and not worrying about investment hurdles as a way to move forward. So that is great. So now I'm going to switch to Elaine really quickly who does a lot of advising and works with different types of asset owners, family offices, and has a place-based approach, actually, to your work. So, Juan, any ahas or epiphanies in the exercise for you, but then also how does this show up with actually developing RFP processes. So, you know, that was one of the options up here and how challenging is that to create an RFP that's going to get you what it is that you ultimately want in your advisor. Yeah, so what was the first question? Ahas or epiphanies. Okay, ahas and epiphanies. So, more of affirmation. So, I was sharing with one of the tables, I sit on two family foundations, and before I came here today, we were going through this exercise, literally. I'm just kind of figuring out we had actually hired a consultant and now it's like, now that we're having conversations seeing where people are stuck. And so we had to do a, in our conversation in our task group, doing a level set. So then the translation into, okay, then what does the RFP look like? What I have noticed, and I'd love to hear from you, Rachel, a lot of times folks don't know what they actually need. And so what I think is really important is put out the RFP, but also be open when you receive responses that don't necessarily respond to the RFP. And the reason I say that is because the people responding have been doing this for a while, and they can see things that you can't see just based on how you wrote the RFP. Right? They're like, oh, you have a couple of blind spots, and I think you might need to take a couple of steps backwards before you move forward. And I can tell you I've gotten passed over, and then people come back to me a year or two later, because they realize, oh, snap, we weren't really where we thought we were. We paid all this money out to somebody else. And then they want me to discount my rate to clean up on aisle five, six, and seven. Like literally, I can't tell you, they bucked my price when I first come out. They, I tell them what they actually, what I think they might need based on my experience. They go and hire somebody else. And then I got to come back. They come back to me and want me to clean up. And sometimes I tell them no. Right? No. No. No. So immediately no. So I just, I just, all of that to say of the open, be, be thoughtful. It's an organic process. It's an iterative process. And take seriously into consideration when you get those responses back, and maybe they're not in the cookie cutter way that you put the RFP together. And, and, and think about, don't think about speed. This is not a destination. And I think all too often I see in RFPs, it's all about, we're going, we're going to get our investment policy done. And that's great. But maybe there's some work that needs to happen to slow down before you actually get an investment policy that is sticky, that is sustainable, that's realistic. Right? Thank you. So Julianne, we've done a few sessions together. And one of the things that I've always admired and you did this at the beginning was the level setting and actually producing a lot of content like the learning that needs to happen as well. So one, any ahas or epiphanies as we were developing the exercise, but then two, can you speak to the significance of doing that? Like why it's so important that learning was one of the options, but also why that needs to be a part of the process. And the next question is open on Slido. Thank you. So, so as Erica mentioned, we at Reinventure try to share resources as widely as possible. And so if you go to our website, reinventurecapital.com, there's a whole page that's third party resources that is not comprehensive. It is not exhaustive. It does not cover the entire waterfront, so to speak. But we try to provide at least representative resources because we know that people are trying to learn. And learning is an ongoing and as you heard Elaine say, it's not a once and done process. The learning and improving your investment practices is an ongoing and sustained endeavor. But in terms of what to do, the thing that I have found super encouraging and energizing and heartening is that I will just tell you, my retirement account is not going to make anybody supremely jealous. Like I have a modest retirement account, right? And I was able to move that retirement account away from someone who was not interested whatsoever in my values or my impact objectives to someone who wasn't frankly super excited but was receptive and willing to learn. And together over the past couple of years, we've moved my, again, not monumental, but nevertheless my retirement account is aligned with my values. And it didn't happen instantaneously, but we were able to do it. And here's the really phenomenal part. Now that advisor is taking those same approaches to other clients. And that is how I get to have outsized impact, right? Because it's not just the impact of my own retirement savings. It's the impact of that advisor reaching other clients and saying, oh, look what I've done for this other client. We could try something similar for you. What are you interested in? What do you care about? And that practice is shifting as a result. And so that's why it's really important to realize that even if you don't feel like you have a huge amount of capital authority, you don't have mountains of cash. Nevertheless, you, in your own decisions, professionally or personally, have the ability to effect real change with your money. Yeah, thank you. The other thing that I would add is about this option of changing the investment consultant. And you asked about my take on RFPs. I'm just going to give you a really quick fact. If you're looking for a BIPOC asset manager, or a BIPOC rather, excuse me, investment consultant or financial advisor, and you're also looking specifically, if you're looking for black lead and you're looking for one that focuses on impact, you have your choice of about 10. Do you really want to release an RFP and put people through that much work when your choice is among 10? So think about not doing an RFP. Think about what your values are and think about whether or not you'd be willing to have a couple of conversations with one of the 10. So just a different framing of the situation as well. Thank you for that, Rachel. And it is true. And one of the things, one of the two things that actually happened with that one is being very focused, razor focused, but that's also signaling to the field. And I think that was one of the reasons we put the options up that we did as well, that until there's accountability for different decision making, it's very hard to move this work forward. So when there is no RFP and there is a focus on what we want and this is what we're going to get and we're going to make it so that that is a signal. But also when the ask is going out and getting actually responses that indicate, wait, there might be something else that needs to happen here taking it seriously. All of these things add up to very important signals about whether or not we're going to maintain status quo. So I would encourage folks to even think about what is it that I want to get accomplished based on my influence, right? Like if I take a systems approach to this, where is my influence and what is it that I'm trying to get done? So you can nine times out of 10 get the thing that you want out of it. But think about, wait, how can I actually use this moment or use my influence? Wherever it is that you sit to actually push and change in other ways as well. So I usually use the example of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation and their consultant that decided that they were going to try to be responsive to a request for more manager diversity. And in that situation, the foundation could have gotten a whole lineup of managers that they wanted. But what they did was ask questions about the way that that consultant operated, the way that they moved, how many firms were being diligence at a time, how many of those firms were led by people of color or owned by people of color and how many firms are they recommending to their clients. And of that how many of them were black owned, Latina owned, women owned that were being recommended. And what they forced was a conversation about one, data not being collected. So that was a change. And two, when the data was collected, why does it look the way that it does. And so because of that process and the intentionality with respect to the systems change that they were trying to see, they changed the practices of that consultant in the field. And I think it's worth noting that, again, the accountability that comes with this cannot be overstated and having to have a willingness to have a consequence for not getting what it is that you fundamentally need to see, but also how that's going to impact other decision makers as well. So I don't want to, how much, what are we on time? We're on what resources, oh, we're at 1212? Okay. I don't know what time this ends. Is this 1230? Okay. Okay. So in our, in our last few minutes, I don't know if there's any more slide, but I did also want to give people the opportunity to ask any questions or to share anything else that came up during the discussions as well. Hello. I had a question about the, I think you said the stewardship circle that you had and I was curious about what kind of decision making authority they have or what really is the role of that circle. Absolutely. So our stewardship circle, it's growing, it was five, it's about to be eight now. They are leaders in social justice movements that also have financial acumen that applies to public markets. It's a very small number of those people. We try to employ all of them. It's not a full-time job. It is, it's a compensated, it's being a compensated member of an advisory circle and they basically oversee the criteria that we use to define racial, gender, economic and climate justice. They also help us select which, like within that criteria, which of those issues should Adesina take on an entire industry investor mobilization effort? Because choosing amongst the many issues to find the ones that are the most impactful, the most intersectional, it can require many, many hours of debate. And we've had some really terrific wins with the campaigns that we've had, so it's really important that selection is actually really important. Does that answer the questions you had? Great. Hi. I was wondering, what are the things you look for as a retail investor in your 401k? So, would it be how they invest or the investments themselves, or is it around the governance, or is it the public commitments that Fund has made? Like, how could you think about what might be the most impactful 401k? So, when we work with individuals, that's not where I start. Where I start with, what do you want it to look like? Right? What is important to you? Because I can give you, and I saw in the word cloud, people were putting templates and frameworks. Right? We have this joke, when you've met one foundation, you've met one foundation. I think the same can be said for investment portfolios. Right? Because different people's interests, what they need, what they're looking for, their timeline, their horizon, it's going to be as individual as your fingerprint. And so, while there might be some commonalities across portfolios, start with, what do you want? What is important to you? What is valuable to you? Is it 51% bike park on the board? Is it woman being CEO? Is it that it's in your backyard? Is it you don't want to be invested in guns, firearms, and tobacco? What's important to you? And then as you start to work within it, a wealth advisor, you start to look at your 401k and start to research what's in it. I think more answers will become clear to you as far as what you do want and what you don't want. So, if you start the journey, you'll start to get the answers to your own questions. But it's really difficult to just kind of be like, okay, what should be the thing? And I will just say I'm not the impact investing police, just in case anybody had any questions about that. So, it's really about your own individual journey. Yeah, the only thing I'll append to that is, that's the reason why we titled this session the way we did, that you have the power to move your money to achieve the change you seek, right? And the change that is most important to you is not going to be the same as the change that's most important to maybe even anybody else in this room. So, that's also why we start the scenario where we do. Like, how do you even begin to think about what your priorities are? What do you really care about? What really matters to you? And then, you know, what can you learn about what's currently in your portfolio? What can you learn about what you would prefer to be invested in? And it will not be a bit flip, right? It will be a process of making these decisions. And the fantastic thing about that is actually the more decisions you make, the clearer it becomes. Like, you don't need it to be clear at the beginning. What you really need is to have that clarity about what you're seeking, and the clarity will appear as you go through the process. And just like in this exercise, everybody in this room might end up at a completely different end point, and that's completely fine. As long as your capital is serving your objectives, you succeeded. And I would add there's three questions that investors with social justice value should ask. There's an article on the Addicina website that you can find, but it's basically what are the issues? Like, is the fund targeting the environment only, and that's their definition of ESG or social good? How are those issues being measured? So if it's gender equity, is it women on the board, or are they measures that actually impact women and gender expansive folks? And then the last question is who told you to measure it that way? The most important question. Tell us more about that on the website. I'd also like to quickly add that, you know, we experimented with this community round thing on B funder, because when we first got started, we needed capital to get it off the ground. We had a lot of conversations, a lot of folks at Foundations and RIAs that worked with impact-oriented investors. And, you know, they all said, why don't you create a round where non-accredited investors could participate and be part of the mission as a stakeholder? And we tried that experiment and we raised over half a billion bucks from folks who sit at Foundations, sit at RIAs, we can't publicly name them, but they were able to write checks of $200,000, right up to $50,000, but really be part of and be engaged in some of the impact that they want to see. So, for example, you can, as an individual, you can go to V funder right now and also look at these B cops and, you know, what various new B cops are doing and pick and choose what you want to do. You don't have to put a thousand bucks from your RIA or from your 401K, just put $200 or whatever, but, you know, encourage missions that you believe in as an individual is what I would say. So, before Erika or Julianne closes us out, so you have markers on your tables as a result of this conversation and those of you coming in, straggling in with lunch, we hope you would join us in this last part of our session, which is, if there is a commitment that you have arrived at as a result of this conversation, we ask you to do two things. One, write it on the back of your name badge. That's what the markers are for. Or the front. There's more room if you've got a long commitment, you might have to put it on the back. But if it's a short one, put it on the front so everybody can see. And put it in the Slido. We'd love to have a record, it's anonymous, so we'd love to have a record that we can share out with you of what were all the commitments that came out of this conversation. It's always super exciting. So, write your commitment. Whatever that is, whether that's, I'm going to have a conversation with my wealth advisor. I'm going to look into my 401K and see what I'm invested into my 401K. I'm going to look into a local business that I might want to invest in. Whatever that you've left with today, I'm going to ask more questions. I'm going to reach out to Rachel or Julianne or Erica. Whatever that is, no matter how small or how big, it's not insignificant. Everything starts with a footstep, so don't discount your footstep and put it on your badge. And we would love for you to put it in the Slido so we have an archive of it. And once again, it's anonymous, so no one will know it's you. Okay. So, with that, I don't know if there are any final questions or reflections from the audience. Anything from our panel before? Final word from our panel before we wrap up. Whether it's commitment, one last piece of brilliance for everyone. Call me. If you want to sign up for the Addicina newsletter, you can text the word justice to 55444. The word justice to 55444. And you can stay in touch with all of our updates around social justice investing. I'd make a plug to the work Astrid is doing around inclusive capital consortium. They're putting out a series of black papers that's really very, very thought-provoking and gets to some of the root causes of some of the problems we're trying to solve today. So I would encourage you to take a look at that. I would encourage everybody who's in an institutional role of any kind to sign on to the due diligence to Dotto commitment. It is really a fantastic tool to begin to reframe the way you approach due diligence to come up with better outcomes, better across the board, better impact outcomes, better financial outcomes. So if you are in a personal investing role, then again, I would encourage you to take the time to have the internal dialogue or have a dialogue with your spouse or significant other with your family about what do we really care about? Where do we want our money to be working in the world? What do we consider to be our values and how do we start to think about that in terms of our dollars or euros or whatever capital we're deploying?