 All right, guys, should we begin to start with introductions? OK. Sure. I mean, I'll go first. I'm Greg. Hi, everybody. I'm one of the principals at K-Port Capital. We are an early stage venture capital firm that invests in technology companies that close gaps of access, opportunity, and outcome for low-income communities and communities of color in the United States. Great. I'll go next. I'm Naira Jordan. I'm with the American Family Insurance Institute for Corporate and Social Impact on one of those community and social impact investment directors. And we invest in seed and series tech companies that align to healthy youth development, equity and education, climate and community resilience, and economic empowerment and justice reform. Thanks for having me here today. So hi, everybody. Eric Chapman, I'm a managing principal at SustainVC. We've been doing early stage impact investing since 2007, have something on the order of 43 companies in our portfolio. All of them have some kind of a social or environmental impact baked into the business model. So it's the business scales and grows, the impact scales and grows, and can't be stripped out later if they get acquired or a different ownership structure takes over. And yeah, very pleased to be here today. We focus similar to my colleagues on series seed series A. Chris. Thank you. I'm Chris Bentley. I'm a seed early stage impact investor. I actually started off working with SustainVC and the, and Eric's team. And then I went to work with Josh Malman at serious change investments. And you know, most recently decided to really focus in on a theory of impact around addressing issues related to the criminal justice system. So last year I launched the incarceration fund, which is a seed and early stage impact fund that's looking to capitalize on, I think what's an important but overlooked opportunity, which is scaled by enterprises that are working to eliminate suffering caused by the criminal justice system. And so we invest in businesses that are returning power and agency to individuals that have had it systematically taken away. And we'll talk a little bit about some examples of those investments and how we're moving forward. So just to level set the discussion today, we're sort of gonna touch on four different topics here. Greg's gonna start us out by giving us a sort of level set of some of the unjustness that exists in this space. And now he's gonna talk about some really important ecosystem development work that's going on. I'm gonna talk a little bit about policy and how policy impacts the impact investment space. And then Eric's gonna jump into some private sector solutions and we'll all talk a little bit about examples there. I think we're gonna try our best to answer questions sort of as they go if we see things that we can hit on in the chat room that we're all gonna sort of manage each of these like little mini panels. So we'll all chime in a little bit after each person started and do our best to work our way through it. So I guess with all that context, I'll pass it up, Greg, and then we can start. Thanks. Yeah, and feel free to jump in on mine. I tend to ramble. So put the bumper bowling bumpers on. So when I think about what impact is and kind of especially as it relates to justice, I think that there's an important distinction that should be made between what impact investors can do in our role. The way that I look at kind of these big problems that we have in our world society, picture poison, there's kind of two arenas. There's market land and there's what I call structure land. And structure land is just like government and law and all the stuff that is really hard to change that's been a collective governance or collective action for hundreds of years that is typically enduring. And then the other side is market land where if you take well-structured, well-intentioned, intelligent capital and apply it to a market land solution, things can change and that's great. When we're talking about justice however, most of justice lives, most of the issues in justice in the justice sector in our carceral state and people getting locked up too often and racial issues in there that are obviously playing, have been playing us for hundreds of years, et cetera, et cetera, most of that lives in structure land. And so the tools of market land are not always the most, it's the word I'm looking for. Impactful's the wrong word, but it can feel that way, certainly. And so that's just one kind of big differentiate or kind of one differentiation I wanted to make as we talk about this today is there's certain things that policy and collective action, organizing, government, legal lobbying, et cetera, et cetera, can help solve and a lot of the big structural issues in our justice system I think are better served being addressed in that arena versus an app that'll help someone do something. But there are things in the margins, in the periphery, sometimes right in the middle where market land can have a outsize impact. So just wanted to say that, I think that it's important to acknowledge that it typically gets crazier in regulated industries and justice is literally the application of state force. So I just wanna acknowledge that as we go forward and just let everyone know that's kind of how we think about it, K-Port. Yeah, I'll chime in and say kind of similarly at the Institute, we think about it that way as well. We didn't necessarily define it in those terms that you use by love that how you spoke about that. Cause I think it is a great illustration of that. And so we do the investment side to your point of there are apps and there are platforms out there that can help make life easier and solve certain issues but we also are bigger things. And so for us, we kind of function across both of those. So recognizing that there is power and influence with corporations stepping into these spaces. So we try to see where we can also help move the needle on that structural or systemic side as well. So raising awareness to issues like in our own state, Wisconsin, where American family insurance is domiciled. We have some pretty strict expungement laws. And so we've come out for a bill that's on our Senate right now that was coming before actually earlier in the summer and we came out in the press and publicly on record to say that we felt that this new bill was something that was important. So we feel like we have this responsibility on both sides, recognizing that there's more than one way to engage in this, as well as our own internal house cleaning that we're doing in terms of looking at some of our policies and practices. Yeah, I can add into that as well as sort of the, we also are all very keenly aware of some of the damage that has been caused by the private sector in the space. And so it's really important that as we look at these opportunities, we think about that and we think about what the companies that we're investing in are really doing and our incentives aligned and so forth. So we'll certainly jump into that and sort of helpful to understand the sort of broad reach of outcomes in this space. There's the more than two million individuals that are incarcerated, but there's the more than six million people that are under supervision and there's the more than 10 million children who have one or more parents that have been affected by incarceration. So it's extremely wide reaching with extremely painful outcomes associated with it. So maybe that's actually a really smart way to transition into some of the stuff that's going on in this space and maybe Naira talk a little bit about something that she's been working on. Yeah, absolutely. I'll share a little bit about how we, as we started to launch into this space. So Institute opened in 2018 where we really started to dive into what we were calling at that time is issue around mass incarceration and we didn't have the words around justice tech when we started looking for companies to invest in and what we did was we started going through tools like Pitchbook and working through our network and looking for companies that we felt were going to help reduce recidivism and reduces impacts on individuals and communities. So really broadly defining that. And as we were going through this process and trying to find all of these possible investment opportunities that fit within that space, what we came to discover through our networks and going to events, we ran into folks from Village Capital and found out they were doing similar. They were also trying to define this space and gain better understanding of it. So last September, Village Capital and the Institute, we convened a summit. We worked together and brought a group of individuals that are connected to the space to think about how do we define this? Because we were defining in a certain way and looking for opportunities, they were defining in a certain way. And so we thought, let's figure out how we can move forward and really redefining criminal and civil justice tech from a ethical human center perspective. Because I think to some of the things Greg alluded to, we were both struggling, both entities were struggling with different aspects of the platforms and the tools that we were seeing. So this summit just really offered a chance for us to listen to our justice tech advisory board which was a group of experts and individuals with a strong perspective on technology and the justice system. And so in this past spring, we were able to produce and release a justice tech market assessment that was largely informed and inspired by that summit as well as an additional 150 hours of interviews and meetings with advisory board members as well as entrepreneurs that are operating in this space. And one of the key findings from the report was that kind of what we were discovering in our research was that many of these justice tech startups fall across a variety of tech verticals. And we were truly looking to divine justice tech as that tech that enables that support for individuals and families as well as experts and technicians that are working within the justice tech space and in the criminal justice and civil justice industry but with that human centered lens on it. And in doing that, we found that financial health, future of work, government tech, healthcare, communications tech and legal tech were all these sectors that were fragmented across this market. And so we released that after releasing that market assessment, we thought one of the other outcomes of this was entrepreneurs saying we want access to capital and many investors aren't familiar with this space and many investors are leery of investing and particularly founders that have a lived experience of incarceration. And so we have been working now to build an investor coalition in this space to begin engaging others that have influence in capital to make change. And so we had our first convening just last week. And I think as we've already started to talk about even here what we talked about last week was our biggest challenge is to discern between ethical tech and tech that could pretty much exacerbate these systemic disparities that we see in the justice system because we've also seen and heard about those technologies that are disrupting the system but are not disrupting in a way that is ethical. And so we wanna make sure that we're helping move the needle forward. So thinking about the value propositions of these products are they providing meaningful improvement to the lives of justice involved individuals and their families. Thinking about what does it mean to successfully scale these solutions? Is it tied to the reduction rather than the expansion of the number of justice involved individuals? And then finally, is it a company that has, if it has that exit, what does that look like and how does it in fact, justice involve people? And so that's just kind of how we've been trying to really start to build this coalition around this concept and really get others in the room and everybody in the room that cares about this space as well as those impacted by this space to start to have these conversations instead of us having these in our silos. So I'd welcome any other perspectives and thoughts on this. I'm gonna jump in for a second because I just put the, what I hope is the correct link in the chat there. Yeah. And I can have a visual prop. Look, so I admit I doodled on it a little bit but it's actually, it's a really pretty detailed report and I found it to be fascinating reading and all of my colleagues here on screen have put a lot of time into this and I think it's excellent. We focus on this area, but not to the same extent that you all do. So I found it to be a really exceptionally comprehensive view on the space and I would simply encourage those in the audience to follow the link, get the report, read it. It's really exceptional, I think. One of the things that struck me as we began and we've made three investments in this space, but one of the, we really struggled with a couple of things. One you just touched on, which is this question of, is it, will this company be ethical today and will it stay ethical tomorrow or is there a risk that somehow there are unintended consequences either with the current or perhaps even a future management team? So this is quite a challenging thing to discuss and to work your way through. The other is that the kernel justice system is incredibly fragmented because you go up through local, county, state, federal, all the different agencies and there's a tremendous number of people in the system, but they're often in very different disparate systems. So you really have to chip away at it from a lot of different angles. And I think we're gonna talk about that a little bit later and I know a profile, how our companies in our portfolio do that. But I just thought that was worth mentioning and I thought the report does a very good job of pointing that out. So we have a question in chat. Can you just share more about the group you just mentioned? Is that open to others? Yeah. Do you wanna maybe say, I put the link in, but it might not be the right one. Maybe you should say a little more. No, absolutely it is open to other investors that are interested in learning more about the sector. It is, we have representatives from, I mean, Chris has been a part of it. I think Greg has attended some of our sessions that we've had in the past. We have representation from the five ventures that is looking to expand their role in this space. They've already done some incredible work, but other investors that are really, really wanting to think about how we can start to change this space. So if you're an investor and this is a space that's of interest to you and you're looking to learn more, absolutely reach out to me on LinkedIn, Naira Jordan, and would be happy to connect you. Like I said, had one last week, we have two more scheduled for this year. Yeah, and I'd like to say a really important thing that is happening, the broader advisory board, not just the investment subgroup, included investors, entrepreneurs, nonprofit leaders, policy advisors, but also fully 50%, maybe more than 50%, had direct lived experience in the criminal justice system. And I think an important recurring theme in this work, to do this work well is to incorporate the voice of returning citizens in these kinds of solutions and discussions. And it's part of the design of the Justice Tech Group. It's part of the design of the Decarceration Fund and truly a number of the really innovative solutions are coming from returning citizens as well. So we're investing in returning citizen founders as well. I think Naira's gonna talk about one of those when we get to that part of the discussion. But I think Chris, to your point, and I'd be interested to see what Craig and Naira's view is, but the fact that as investors, we always look for somehow lived experience, experience with the problem. Do you really understand the problem set to use sort of the generic language of venture capital? But in this space particularly, I think we have the ability to incorporate a tremendous number of impacts in doing this, especially if we focus on investing in people who have lived experience, who in many cases are disproportionately affected by these systems. And at the same time, it's actually just a good business policy. And the converse is also true. I think all of us could probably tell stories and we'd probably wanna refrain from doing that about companies we've looked at who have great ideas but very arm's length experience with what they're trying to work on. So well-intentioned, but actually not direct experience. So I think you're right, having the returning citizen's voice and other participants' voice is really critical. I don't know, Greg or Naira, if you wanna comment on that further, but. No, I would say I agree totally with that statement, but I think the fact that we'll talk about the economic piece of it as well, it's very intentional that our space is economic empowerment and justice reform because that does for us put out that intention that there are challenges with individuals that do have that lived experiences. And oftentimes, starting their own business based off of the solutions that they know because they have been a part of this system is the option and is the most optimal option. And so that is very important for us to make sure that we are providing that economic opportunity for these individuals and it's through our hiring, but it's also through supporting their startups and providing that capital. And in some cases it's that really, really early stage, which is why we do have that other side of the work that we do because they may not be ready for the equity investment from our institute fund side, but we also wanna support accelerators and that idea stage to help them become a part of that pipeline, so that investment and they can get to that seed stage to get in front of those investors who are looking for that as well. Yeah, I mean, we talk about it at K-POR in terms of lived experience with the problem, we also use a term called distance travel. That doesn't necessarily mean that all our justice investments have to be formally incarcerated individuals. There's more than enough suffering that our incarceration system is put onto entire communities in this country and lots of those entrepreneurs are also working to, or from those backgrounds are working to undo some of that injustice and it doesn't necessarily need to be them who's had to deal with it directly. It could have been a parent or a brother or sister or a child or whatever it may be. Unfortunately, with the incarceration rates as they are, a lot of people know someone who's been locked up. So we think that we're not, what's the word, ideological about this by any stretch, but we do think that it's important for founders to have a real stake in the outcome if they're correct and successful. Yeah, and in cases where we don't see that experience on the management team, we'll often also encourage the management team to actively begin to recruit from that space too. And there's a lot of great nonprofit groups as a group called Televaraday, which is working with a couple of women's prisons that's training on business development in the tech industry and they are getting women trained up and prepared and placed in great roles at companies like Salesforce and Adobe and large tech companies, but encouraging our tech companies to be looking to that same pool to recruit business development folks. And there's other great nonprofits doing the same work on engineering and coding as well. So there's lots of opportunities to find some great resources here and add that piece of the experience to the team. So I think that's something else I would encourage when investing in this space to look for opportunities to build that experience in if it's not organic in the founders. Let me, I don't wanna awkward pause while I'm trying to read this next question. So while someone else from the team checks that out, I'll start into the next section anyways and then we'll go from there. So I wanna sort of detail a little bit more into some of what Greg and Eric touched on which is sort of on the structure side, on the policy side, it is a sort of hyper-local issue. And so an important aspect of criminal justice reform is better policy and many may make the argument that our resources will be better spent advocating for better policy rather than looking for sort of market based solutions to problems. And while better policy could greatly improve the system and we certainly spend a fair amount of time all advocating for better policy in this space, it's slow moving, but it's also, it's super local, right? So most laws that can really have a significant impact on criminal justice reform need to be changed state by state and even county by county. That as an example, if we take cash bail as an example, this is a system that incarcerates individuals that have not yet been convicted of a crime based on how much money they have in their bank account, right, at its root. And there has been public support for the elimination of cash bail in a lot of places and states and large cities have moved to eliminate cash bail, which is progress, but literally at the exact same time there are states passing legislation that actually makes it easier to implement cash bail and actually eliminates the opportunity for nonprofits to step in and help with cash bail. And so I bring that up as an issue of, there's a little bit of a sort of whack-a-mole process in trying to use policy alone to solve these problems. And sometimes we can find really innovative solutions that actually amplify good policy and make good policy more effective. And sometimes we can find innovative solutions that actually can really disrupt bad policy and make bad policy ineffective. And so those are a subset of the kinds of things that we think about when looking at that policy as a whole. Yeah, it's like this is one of the parts of our work at K-4 that I think we don't really talk much about, but when you're investing in these types of structure land industries or heavy structure industries, understanding where the policy winds are blowing and understanding how, whether you're as an entrepreneur or as a, I guess, an intermediary where you can put a little bit of extra oomph behind it. We've seen some really good successes with that. Actually, it's a whole new way of trying to effect change, for sure, but if you have the solution for, let's say, parole monitoring, and it's actually a decent human one, not a dehumanizing one, getting written in as the standard in your state is not only important for longevity of the company, but also important for maintaining that solution as a long-term boon to society. And justice is one of those few industries where it's like, if you're not playing that game, you're doing yourself a disservice because everyone else is. And so it's kind of like learning the rules of how to influence and change these types of things. It's a long game. I feel like it takes a long time. You've got to, it's a separate business, I think, also in some ways, but if you want that really kind of enduring piece, I think policy has to be a part of it. This isn't Peter Thiel, the government should be an algorithm type thing. Right? Yeah, and I'll build on that slightly because I think there's a very interesting overlap between, as you coined it, market land and structure land. So there's a lot of businesses that have been able to affect policy and write in the requirements for their particular product or service that make it very difficult for new entrants to come in and disrupt those markets because there's statutes written as to what the product or service has to be able to do or cannot do. And this is a classic GovTech way of actually creating a monopoly situation where one hadn't existed before. And so this is an interesting overlap of as you describe it, policy and the free market solution. And so it does take time to change that, but that is one of the routes to disruptive change. And part of the challenge is for entrepreneurs to identify ideally before they start an idea how quickly and to what degree can they change that? How cost-intensive is that going to be? How time-intensive? And how much impact will that unlock? And also how much market potential will that unlock? But in the end, underneath all of that the common denominator is lives affected, right? And so this is really a fight worth fighting. And I think that's a lot of us take a longer view for this particular space because the speed at which change occurs is slower. But that's an important factor also, I think for us to all consider in the audience to know and understand. So you're right, there's not gonna be an algorithm that comes in and suddenly makes sweeping change. It'd be great if that would happen, but unlikely. But it can be chipped away at. Chris, should we shift to a little bit on our companies? I think that might be of great interest at this point with 15 minutes left. Yeah, that's actually, I was gonna say that night. I realized I was on mute, but this might be a good, there may be a great opportunity to switch into, are there really private solutions out there that actually exists today? Yeah, so I'll moderate this section a little bit. I think Greg first, you're gonna go with promise Chris Adobo near up Hidgenley. And then I'll wrap up if we have time left with reconnect, but these are I think four pretty interesting companies who touch in different spaces. And interestingly enough among this group, we actually have a lot of overlap in some of our investments too, which is nice to see. So let's kick it off. Yeah, sure. I'll start with promise. So to Naira's point earlier about how these types of solutions don't always look like just this tech, there's no one justice tech, there's no monolith of what these types of companies can be. I think promise is a good example of this. Promise was started by a wonderful woman named Phaedra Ellis-Lamkins, a piece of factoid. She was actually Prince's manager at one point. She's awesome. And she really wanted to figure out how do we get, the goal of the company is, how do we get poor people to not go to jail? Because her view is that the poor are disproportionately targeted by the justice system and that's wrong. And so when they started, they were trying to take on cash bail and they were actually paying people's cash bail and then having people being released into promises I guess like recognizant? I don't know what the word is. And that was not scalable. The justice departments were not a fan of that. There's all sorts of liability issues with that. And so they took a pretty big pivot and they said, all right, well, if our goal is to stop poor people from going to jail, what is something else that we can do? And so they basically looked at how poor people end up in jail and one of the first kind of interactions with the state in a negative way, typically, is failure to pay a utility bill or failure to pay a ticket or something like that. And a lot of those systems that manage those payment systems are from the 80s or the 90s. They're very clunky. They're not meant to be easily used and there's not really a reason why they're that way. Additionally, a lot of the government agencies and municipalities and all these folks are on paper very willing to do flexible payments for their constituents. But for years, they just hid behind, oh, well, the software doesn't do that. So Promise has basically created a government payments platform that has flexible payment options built in for constituents and allows them many, many different ways to pay off these types of debts or fees or whatever it may be in a way that is, I would say decent from a human level. And again, what an innovation. You just need to design the platform to be a little bit more flexible for folks, but they're seeing really, really good results and they just raise a whole bunch of money and they're doing great. So definitely not like your typical justice tech investment, but I think it is solving a significant problem for a lot of folks and preventing our car shell state from putting everyone in jail. That's great. Thank you, Greg. I wonder, I think we're gonna go to you next, Chris from Adovo, but before we do, I just wanna call out a comment in the chat. I'll just read it out. I guess people can read it as well from Noah. Thank you for that. He says, and I'll read it out loud to give my colleagues here a chance to think about it because it might be interesting if it's relevant, we can touch on it in our pieces here, but he's saying, I agree with the panelists about the need for policy change in conjunction with disruptive technologies to address many of the problems justice tech companies look to address. Do you have any thoughts for how companies can work with nonprofits to address policy goals as well? I think that's a very interesting one, how companies can be tightly aligned with nonprofits that have common overlapping goals. And I think in there, he's listed his company, and I think that would be interesting for people to take a look at at some point. Yeah. Adovo, and we can think about that. That's a very interesting point. Yeah. Yeah, and nice to see you on here, Noah. And Noah's actually attacking the same problem that Adovo was working on attacking as well, which is education for individuals while they're incarcerated and under supervision. So I'll talk a little bit about Adovo first, but Adovo uses tablet-based technology to allow self-directed educational programming in prisons and jails, and it's a sort of wide range of academic, vocational and treatment programming. This is based on the idea that there are studies that basically show a dollar investment in educational programming results in five dollar reduction and incarceration costs, right? That's the very sort of dollar-for-dollar public cost that comes out of there. But the reason for that is that inmates that participate in correctional education programs actually see 43% lower odds of recidivism than inmates that did not. And that's actually a study that's corrected for all the sorts of outside variables that may encourage somebody to participate or not participate in educational programming. So it's a really important study, and it's really important to the work that Noah's doing in the space as well. Adovo has over 150,000 learners that have completed over a million hours of educational programming on the platform, and 75% of individuals that have had access to the program use it on an average of two lessons completed per day. So it's very well used. About 150 facilities are now using the product in one way or another. And so it's a really interesting approach. Along the way, similar to promise, it's not sort of as much of a change in product. The end product is still maintained the same, but the way they've gone to market has sort of evolved quite significantly over time. And a lot of it is really based on the navigation of some of the other private sector groups that are involved in this space and some of the other issues that exist in the space. And so all that to say that all of this work requires some tricky impact risk navigation in all, I think, all of these companies. And I think that's why it's important that I think you'll note that I think in all of the cases that we described here and being involved early as investors and having some level of work participation and participation in the sort of strategy of these companies that they've been before, it is pretty important. And I think that's where we can serve a really important role, particularly as other sort of larger investors move into this space. They think having folks that are involved and understand the space is pretty important as well. Great, I'll jump into Pigeonly quickly. So you have time, Eric. Pigeonly, and you'll see this if you read the report is really noted as kind of being the kickoff or starting point, if you will, for justice tech with the K-4 investment in like 2012, 2013, somewhere in that space. AMFAM actually Pigeonly was our first investment in this space. When we launched in 2018, Frederick Hudson, the founder was actually the inaugural speaker at our institute when we hosted a gathering in our space here in Madison, Wisconsin. And it was actually in talking to him and hearing his story that we actually were all like, we need to learn more about what he's doing and the impact that he's making. And if you know Frederick's story, just a very high level, it was during his incarceration that he realized the people that he was seeing return were individuals that were not as connected to their families, that were not getting the phone calls, were not getting the letters. And so he started to ideate on this idea of Pigeonly, this platform that would provide a cost effective way, a cost effective communication platform for families to stay connected to their loved ones. If any of you have ever had someone that's been incarcerated and have received those phone calls, they're quite expensive. If you research it, it ranges anywhere from $15 to $25, depending on the one phone call. And so if you think about, this whole idea of criminalizing the poor continuing to make it difficult for them to advance, you're now making a decision on, do I talk to my loved one or not based off of your economic situation? And so Frederick saw that and created this incredible tool that bypasses that and makes it more economical. He also provides a way for families to stay connected through mail. And I think through our conversations that we've been having here, the innovation is that he's also looking to see, understand policy and understand how he can scale and grow based off of that long game we've talked about. And just that was what we were impressed with because we joined at one stage, but he definitely had a clear vision about what pigeoning would be. And so to Chris's comment about being engaged and connecting with founders and understanding what their goals are and how they interacted with the system, I've been just very fortunate to be an observer on the board and be connected with Fred as a friend. And so I just think it's another one of those platforms when we were looking at it, we were looking for ways to reduce recidivism. And we weren't necessarily thinking about the system itself, but more how to help families. And so this was one that definitely jumped out for us. And I think I'm handing it to you, Eric. You are, but I gotta give a quick shout out from the chat here. It says, I'm a big fan of Frederick and Pigeonly, double exclamation point. Thank you for sharing the other businesses too. So well done. Nice. Yeah. Well, we've got four minutes left. I'll go very quickly so I can hand back to Chris for the final wrap up. Yeah, and there's another nice chat for you. So ReConnect is a company that we invested in about a year ago. Their main focus is if you think about it, there are people who have been released from jail, pretrial, specialty court, parole, and there's other functions that are similar that all, and it's done at the local state and federal level. And the key denominator, the common denominator across all of this is there are conditions associated with your release. You need to see your parole or probation or especially court officer at a certain period of time. You need to do various things. You may have curfew checks. You may have courses or classes you need to take, et cetera, et cetera. The list goes on and on. And on average, each of these participants, if you will, use that word, have something like 18 things that are meant to do every day. Now, I don't know about anybody out there, but without this, I can't do more than one thing a day. So in the technology platform that exists for most people to deal with all of this is paper-based, rudimentary, maybe phone. So the entire idea of reconnect is to take all of those administrative burdens and put it onto a modern technology platform that allows both the participants and this case managers to simply check in, remind, let you know you have an appointment, allow you to send a text, I'm running late, allow you to actually do check-ins that in the past pre-COVID would have to be done in person physically in somebody's office to then be handled perhaps through a video chat, perhaps there's simply a geo-tag picture that you have attended your AA class or you did do this or you didn't go there and so on and so forth. You have checked in at your curfew time. And if you think about it, I think this is nicely outlined in the report. I'll show it again, because I like doing that. But there's, one of the facts is something like 40% of the people who end up going back are because of technical violations and what I've just described are technical violations. And so the objective of this company is really to try and take a lot of that inefficiency and friction loss out of the system and do it in a humane way that increases people's likelihood of actually succeeding and allows case managers to focus on areas where they can help people versus simply the administrative burden of saying, did you do it? So that's reconnected in a nutshell and with just about a minute left, Chris, sorry, I didn't leave you much. I'll hand back to you. No, that's great. And not much. I think we actually got through the entire program with a minute to spare, which is great. I will quickly touch on Noah's question as well. I do think the impact space as a whole creates lots of opportunities for private sector companies to interface with nonprofits. Matter of fact, one of the reasons I think one sort of helpful piece that reduces risk in this type of investing, which of course is always can be fairly risky from a financial standpoint is the fact that many of the companies in the impact space have access to non-diluted capital and grants and other nonprofit dollars. And so I think it is important for companies where possible to interface with nonprofits that are doing similar work and also learn from them because it's the nonprofits doing hard work in this space that really can reveal a lot of what works and what doesn't work in the space. And I think that's really important to understand and remain connected with those organizations. And I'm just trying to throw into the chat some of the links. So I got reconnected and pigeonly and I will try and find quickly Dovo and Promise but people can check it out and their websites are great. And I'll just throw one more plug that if people are interested in learning more about our investor convening and the next two convenings and our collaborative please reach out and we'll be happy to bring you on board to those conversations. Excellent. Thanks so much everybody for attending. I guess with that we can sign off. Thanks everybody. Thanks everyone. Thank you all. Have a good one.